whos afraid of the big bad crisis

IMPRESSUM

Author: Nikola BukovićTranslation: Jezični atelierProof-reading: Anamarija SočoDesign and print: ACT PrintlabISBN: 978-953-7805-11-1CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the National and University Library in Zagreb under 820737.

Opinions expressed in this publication are of the author and they do not necessarily reflect opinions of the Croatian Youth Network

.......................................................................................... 7......................................................................... 13

................................................. 69

..................................................................... 16

...................................................................... 75

................................................................ 25

............................................................ 76

.......... 25

............................................. 78.................................................... 80

........................................................... 26

........................................................... 81

................................................... 28

...................................................... 85

.. 30

.............. 85

........................................................................... 32

................... 88

................................................................. 32

........................................... 94

............................................................................ 33

............................................ 94

............................. 39

...................................................................... 94

...................................................................... 97

................................... 43........ 44

........................... 46....................... 47

..................................................... 101

................................................ 48.... 50

................................. 51.. 53

........................................................ 106

.......................................... 55..................................................... 108

............... 57................................................... 57

............................................................... 113

................................. 60

................................................................................ 117

.... 62................................................. 63

...................................... 120................. 121

.............................. 64.................................. 67

..67

CONTENTS:1. Foreword2. Acknowledgements3. Summary of the study4. Introduction and context4.1. The structured dialogue on youth employment in Croatia4.2. The state of the Croatian labour market and the role of the structured dialogue4.3. Description of the methodology4.3.1. Discussion about the methodology – advantages and disadvantages4.4. Realized sample4.4.1 Online questionnaire4.4.2. Focus groups5. Summary of the results of online consultations6. Youth unemployment – a view from within6.1. Sketching a portrait – supporting pillars of a phenomenon6.2. The state of education or of weak foundations6.2.1 Transfer of competencies for the labour market6.2.2. (Un)adjusted enrolment quotas6.3. Young people as a social group: (un)fit for challenges of time6.3.1. Mentality of (unemployed) young people6.3.2. The influence of the starting point on available opportunities6.3.3. (Ir)relevance of job-searching skills6.4. Croatian economic conditions: a pessimistic diagnosis6.4.1. The general state of economy6.4.2. (Unjust) practices of Croatian employers6.5. Institutional practices: a gap between the reality and the needs6.5.1. The state: support or obstacle?6.5.2. Work of the Croatian Employment Service6.6. The state of society: a race to the bottom?6.6.1. The generation gap: “children of socialism” vs.“children of transition”

................................................. 69

...................................................................... 75............................................................ 76

............................................. 78.................................................... 80

........................................................... 81...................................................... 85

.............. 85................... 88

........................................... 94............................................ 94

...................................................................... 94

...................................................................... 97.................................................................... 98

..................................................... 101..............................................101

.............103

........................................................ 106

..................................................... 108............................................................... 113

................................................................................ 117

...................................... 120................. 121

.......................................... 125

.................................................... 134

...................................................................... 139

6.6.2. The influence of social climate7. Consequences of youth unemployment: problems of today, an image of tomorrow?7.1. Psycho-physical problems7.2. Negative perception of life chances7.3. The spread of social discontent7.4. The loss of social potential8. Obstacles to youth employment8.1. Obstacles to using active employment policy measures8.2. Young people not perceived as potential employees8.3. Obstacles to youth entrepreneurship9. Support to unemployed young people9.1. Ambivalent support9.2. Inadequate support9.3. Empowering support10. Participants take charge – recommendations and ideas developed during the process10.1. Recommendations for social change10.2. Recommendations for changes in the education system10.3. Recommendations for improving the position of young people on the labour market10.4. Recommendations for improving support to unemployed young people11. Instead of a conclusion12. BibliographyAnnex 1: List of members of the National Working Group for the Implementation of the Structured DialogueAnnex 2: Focus group participants’ recruitment protocolAnnex 3: Results of online consultationsAnnex 4: Protocol on preparation and implementation of focus groups and consultationsAnnex 5: List of stakeholders represented in the structured dialogue consultations

7

1. FOREWORDToday’s young people, born in the period between 1983 and 1997, find themselves in a particularly adverse position, considering the times they live in. Contemporary European societies have indisputably reached the highest level of socio-economic development and offer to young people the greatest amount of resources. However, this is precisely why young people who are not able to fulfil their role as economically active citi-zens find themselves in a precarious situation. Young people in Croatia and other European countries which are facing growing economic, social and political problems are finding it increasingly difficult to become in-dependent from their families and to actively get involved in social and economic processes. The difficult social conditions young people live in today call for youth policies which will recognize the need for participa-tion of young people in the form of a structured dialogue, in all areas re-lated to their self-actualization. The EU Youth Strategy (2010-2018), en-titled “Youth - Investing and Empowering”, defines several fields of ac-tion which mandate more and better financing, youth empowerment and the promotion of the potential of young people for building societies and contributing to European goals and values. These fields of action are: 1. Education and Training, 2. Employment & Entrepreneurship, 3. Health & Well-being, 4. Participation, 5. Voluntary Activities, 6. Social Inclusion, 7. Youth & the World, 8. Creativity & Culture. The structured dialogue, conducted with the purpose of solving prob-lems and coordinating action, is mentioned for the first time in a resolu-tion adopted by the Council of Ministers in 2005. The resolution address-es the European Commission and member states and calls for the devel-opment of a structured dialogue with young people, youth organizations, researchers and decision-makers. The need for a structured dialogue with youth is further underlined in the Communication from the European Commission on “Promoting young people’s full participation in educa-tion, employment and society” from 2007, and in a Council resolution from 2006. The Council Resolution on a Renewed Framework for European Cooperation in the Youth Field (2010-2018) adopted in 2009 states that the structured dialogue at the European level is conducted with the Eu-ropean Commission, member states, national youth councils and the Eu-ropean Youth Forum, during the European Youth Week, EU Presidency youth conferences and unofficial fora organized at the margins of Coun-cil meetings. At the national level, member states are invited to form na-tional working groups made up of representatives of ministries relevant

8

for youth issues, national youth councils, local and regional youth coun-cils, youth organizations, youth workers, young people and researchers in the field of youth. It is strongly recommended, whenever possible, that member states assign to national youth councils the leading role in work-ing groups whose task is to organise consultations on previously agreed topics of the structured dialogue. In the process of the structured dialogue, the European Commission offi-cially announces the beginning of a new cycle of the structured dialogue, reports on its results and ensures findings and feedback. In charge of the coordination of the structured dialogue at the European level is the Eu-ropean Steering Committee for the Structured Dialogue made up of rep-resentatives of the European Commission, European Youth Forum, min-istries for Youth Affairs of EU Presidency trio countries, national youth councils and national agencies for the Youth in Action programme. The European Youth Forum, the chair of the Steering Committee, is the big-gest youth platform in Europe representing young people at informal fora taking place at the margins of conferences organized by the EU Presidency, Commission, Parliament and youth representatives. National youth councils (in Croatia it is the Croatian Youth Network) implement the structured dialogue among youth organizations by organizing local, regional and national consultations. National agencies for the Youth in Action programme (in Croatia it is the Agency for Mobility and EU Pro-grammes) support the process by monitoring the implementation of the structured dialogue and disseminating results, and by implementing the 5.1 sub-action of the Youth in Action programme.The structured dialogue on youth employment was implemented in three phases. The first phase lasted from January to April 2010, with nation-al consultations on the topic of employment. Following that, the Spanish Presidency organized a youth conference in April 2010 which served to set priorities for the next phase. The second phase was focused on imple-menting national consultations on priorities in youth employment which were presented at a conference in Belgium in October 2010. The last phase of the structured dialogue was finalized at a youth conference in Hunga-ry in May 2011 which set priorities for the next structured dialogue cycle. The following EU Presidency trio – Poland, Denmark and Cyprus – have set youth participation as the new topic of the structured dialogue. Each Presidency will organize a youth conference – Poland in September 2011, Denmark in April 2012 and Cyprus in September of the same year. Croatia initiated the process of the structured dialogue on the topic of youth em-ployment in September 2011. The process was coordinated by the Croa-tian Youth Network, with the support of the Ministry of Social Policy and Youth and the Agency for Mobility and EU Programmes.

9

The detailed priorities of the structured dialogue of the current EU Pres-idency trio are:

1. Poland: a) youth cooperation between the EU and the countries of Eastern Europe and the Caucasus, particularly in the field of youth mobility; b) promotion and recognition of non-formal education, in the context of the European Year of Volunteering; c) promotion of active citizenship and the results of the mid-term evaluation of the Youth in Action programme.

2. Denmark: a) creativity and innovation for active citizenship and youth employment; b) follow-up on the initiatives which started during the European Year of Creativity and Innovation 2008; c) exchange of good practices in the field of youth participation in decision-making processes.

3. Cyprus: a) participation of youth organizations and young people in decision-making processes; b) encouraging youth participation on the local level.

The implementation of the structured dialogue across Europe has been relying mainly on three consultation techniques:

1. Organizing meetings with young people which open spaces for direct dialogue and consultations with young people on the set priorities;

2. Compiling existing information and knowledge on good practices of creating and implementing youth policies;

3. Gathering information via questionnaires and other surveys. The most frequently used questionnaires are the ones created by the European Commission for the purpose of the structured dialogue1.

A good and effective cooperation between young people and decision-makers at local, regional and national levels is one of the main precondi-tions for a successful structured dialogue. Taking this into account, and with the purpose of developing a strategy for the structured dialogue in Croatia, the Agency for Mobility and EU Programmes (AMPEU) funded in 2011 a research on the current state of play of youth participation in Croatia and the existence of different forms of structured dialogue at lo-cal, regional and national levels (Structured Dialogue with Young People in Croatia, 2011). In order to analyze the scope and the quality of dia-logue with young people in Croatia, two complementary questionnaires 1 The questionnaire may be accessed at http://ec.europa.eu/youth/pdf/doc1113_en.pdf.

10

were created – one for representatives of youth organizations (30 organ-izations), and the other for 32 representatives of decision-making bod-ies (members of parliament, civil servants in ministries which deal with youth issues and representatives of regional governments). Summarizing the results of the study of the cooperation between deci-sion-makers and youth organizations, and of the existence of structured dialogue in Croatia, the first set of questions offered an insight into coop-eration of youth and decision-makers on financing youth organizations, consultations with youth carried out for the purpose of developing new strategies and legislative acts relevant for young people, and participa-tion in different activities (culture, sport, etc.). Respondents from both sub-samples declared an equal level of initiating communication on both sides. However, young people see themselves taking initiative more of-ten than decision-makers. In addition, representatives of youth organi-zations report more instances of negative reception of their proposals by decision-makers than vice-versa. Most youth organizations participating in the study established cooperation with ministries in charge of youth affairs and with county prefects and their deputies, less so with members of county governments, while most of them never cooperated with mem-bers of parliament, ministers and mayors.Estimating their level of satisfaction with the cooperation with the afore-mentioned decision-makers, young people report highest degrees of sat-isfaction in the case of members of town and municipality governments, members of county governments, and to a lesser degree of county pre-fects and their deputies. However, most declare that their needs were only partially met in the course of the cooperation. It is highly indicative that 23 out of 30 representatives of youth organizations reported over-all dissatisfaction with the cooperation, while 23 out of 32 decision-mak-ers are satisfied with the cooperation with youth organizations. When questioned about areas of cooperation that they are most and least sat-isfied with, representatives of youth organizations consider the coopera-tion in the field of education and informatisation most successful, while the areas of employment, entrepreneurship and social policy remain at the bottom of the list. The study also collected examples of good practice reported both by young people and decision-makers. The areas where cooperation was reported satisfactory matched in both samples and re-ferred to success in changing legislation, forming youth advisory boards, training young people in youth rights, funding youth projects, opening youth clubs, organizing volunteering activities for youth and cultural and sporting events.

11

AMPEU launched the survey on the structured dialogue at a training course organized for representatives of youth organizations and county governments about the basics of the structured dialogue in Europe and the necessary preconditions for its implementation in Croatia. The study was based on the hypothesis that young people and decision-makers are insufficiently informed about the structured dialogue and this was con-firmed by the results of the research. Additionally, there are several ele-ments which were highlighted by young people and decision-makers in their interpretation of what a structured dialogue is. Namely, decision-makers tend to shift the responsibility for the process to young people and expect their stronger engagement and initiative, while representa-tives of youth organizations emphasize the need for creating organiza-tional and technical conditions for the implementation of the structured dialogue. Soon after the completion of the study coordinated and fund-ed by AMPEU, Croatia saw the beginning of its first cycle of the struc-tured dialogue with young people on the topic of youth employment. Its prominent consultative nature and the qualitative and quantitative data-collection methodology will give plenty of insight into different elements of the position of young people on the labour market, from the perspec-tive of young people themselves. This valuable contribution to the struc-tured dialogue made by the Croatian Youth Network is also a test of the preconditions listed by young people and decision-makers in the AMPEU research – youth initiative and organizational and technical precondi-tions for the implementation of the structured dialogue with young peo-ple. This will lay firm foundations for a successful finalization of this cy-cle of the structured dialogue in Croatia, and the beginning of a new cy-cle on the topic of youth participation.

Dr. Sc. Dunja Potočnik

13

2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe implementation of the project “Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Crisis? The Structured Dialogue on Youth Unemployment” started in July 2011. How-ever, it has a much longer history in the Croatian Youth Network (MMH).Identifying the need for a project like this at a moment like this was not at all difficult. Regardless of the fact that the topic of youth unemploy-ment has found its place as a relevant issue in the public sphere, all of us who are engaged, either professionally or voluntarily, in the activities of MMH, in spite of all our differences, share a common feature: we are all young people or have just ceased to be “officially” young. We also belong to the generation carrying the weight of the crisis which has hit Croatian and European economies in 2008. Faced with staggering rates of unem-ployment, poverty and resignation among our peers, we have been more than willing to do something about it.Like anyone else embarking upon a quest for positive social change, we too have encountered a number of challenges which, at the end of the day, come down to two simple questions:

1. Which methods will most effectively contribute to the solution of this problem?

2. How to make sure that our ideas become actions?MMH has been preparing for this process for a long time. This short pub-lication summarizes the work and efforts of previous generations of activ-ists in this organization and of our partners at home and abroad who have shared over the years their knowledge and experiences and prepared us for this moment. A list of all the persons and organizations that, over the years, have empowered MMH to the level necessary for it to take on the leading role in implementing the first national structured dialogue in Cro-atia would be as long as this humble publication. We wish to give to all of them, here and now, a big thank-you, and we hope we have not let them down. Important pieces of the puzzle have been the institutional actors which have recognized the importance of this process and decided to sup-port it financially. The Ministry of Family, War Veterans’ Affairs and Inter-generational Solidarity, and its successor, the Ministry of Social Policy and Youth, have strongly supported the implementation of the structured dia-logue since its very beginning. The support of the Agency for Mobility and EU Programmes, within the framework of the Youth in Action programme, has also been extremely important. We are grateful to both for their vote of confidence and we are looking forward to our future cooperation.

14

Furthermore, an absolutely crucial role in this process has been played by several MMH member organizations which have been involved in it as project partners. They deserve to be listed in this short introduction, in no particular order, because their individual contributions are equally valuable: Domaći from Karlovac, PRONI – Centre for Social Education from Osijek, Info zona from Split, Delta from Rijeka, Krik from Slatina, ZUM from Pula, and HUK from Knin. The kind of cooperation we have with these and other member organizations which have been involved in the implementation and promotion of this project, always remind us how purposeful our work really is. Big thanks go to all the members of the National Working Group for the Implementation of the Structured Di-alogue, and to their institutions which have recognized the value of their involvement in this process. Their suggestions, backed up by their rich expertise, and their willingness to come eye to eye with some unpleas-ant findings we encountered together on our journey, give hope for a bet-ter future of cross-sector cooperation in Croatia. A list of members of the Working Group can be found at the end of this publication in Annex 1. We would also like to thank our associates whose contribution has been invaluable in different stages in the making of this report, Natalija Lukić and Teo Matković, as well as our volunteer Karko Kralj who has done a tremendous job in transcribing the content of our focus groups.At the end, we give our thanks to those who deserve it the most: all the young people who have been involved, in one way or another, in the first national structured dialogue. We are truly indebted to you for your hon-esty, initiative and the trust you placed in us. We readily accept this bur-den of responsibility and we hope that we will all manage to fully use the potential of this advocacy process and continue our journey towards our shared vision... the journey that will once lead us to a society with young people in focus.

On behalf of MMH,

Mirela Travar, Secretary General Nikola Buković, Author

16

3. SUMMARY OF THE STUDYResearch approach/methodology (Chapter 4)

The study you are holding in your hands is a re-sult of the project entitled “Who’s afraid of the Big Bad Crisis? The Structured Dialogue on Youth Unemployment” which was carried out in 2011 and 2012 by the Croatian Youth Network and its se-ven partners, its member organizations. The study gives an overview of the first national structured dialogue in Croatia which focused on the topic of youth unemployment. In cooperation with the par-tners and the National Working Group for the Imple-mentation of the Structured Dialogue, the MMH re-search team developed an approach which combi-ned qualitative and quantitative research methods. This approach to methodology was a necessary com-promise between the need for openness and the qu-ality of the structured dialogue. The first instrument was an online questionnaire targeting young peo-ple aged 15 to 30, which was available at the pro-ject website www.mladi-rade.net. The second instru-ment encompasses focus groups carried out in 8 Cro-atian towns: 4 macro-regional centres (Osijek, Split, Rijeka and Zagreb) and 4 smaller towns (Karlovac, Knin, Pula and Slatina). In each town, one focus gro-up with unemployed and inactive young people was organized, as well as another focus group with em-ployed young people and students. Each focus gro-up had 5 to 10 participants selected according to a previously defined sample, which was consulted in the research team and the Working Group. Where-as the online consultations aimed at collecting ba-sic information about the problem of youth unem-ployment from a wide base of young people, the re-search team principally relied on the focus groups as the dominant source of relevant information in or-der to understand the perspective of young people. The main findings presented in this study were deve-loped according to the information collected in the focus groups.

17

Results of the consultation process (Chap-ters 6-10)

The analysis of the collected information yielded 5 the-matic units which are described in detail. They refer to:

1) participants’ basic discourses on the problem of youth unemployment;

2) consequences of youth unemployment;

3) obstacles to youth employment;4) support to unemployed young people;

5) recommendations for improvement.

Unem-ployment discourse (Chapter 6)

The understanding of the term “basic discourse” in-terwoven in this study matches the definition of Ame-rican post-structuralism philosopher Judith Butler who says that discourse is “…the limit of acceptable speech or truth” (Butler, 1997). In this sense, the ba-sic discourses described in this study refer to the scope in which in the focus groups participants think about youth unemployment. Each basic discourse conta-ins several important narratives. They are stories of a sort but they are characterized by a substantially lower level of abstraction and their focus on mecha-nism and processes. The narratives frame the picture of individual discourses in the same way the discour-ses make up together a complete image of the youth unemployment phenomenon, seen through the eyes of the participants. The detected discourses and narrati-ves frame the scope in which the participants position the problem of youth unemployment in Croatia, thus contributing to the understanding of its complexity.The analysis of transcriptions of the focus groups helped detect 5 basic discourses connected to:

1) state of education;2) young people as a social group;

3) economic conditions;4) institutional practices;5) state of society.

18

Dominant discourse (Section 6.4)

Each basic discourse contains two or three narrati-ves. The most prominent discourse, regardless of the focus group composition2 and the town size, was the one referring to the economic conditions. It encom-passes two narratives: the first is connected to the general state of economy, and the second to the unjust practices of Croatian employers. Additio-nally, in this discourse the participants recognized the problem of “extinction” of the Croatian industri-al production and they noted the ambivalent natu-re of actions which offer a short-term remedy and a long-term development perspective. The lack of jobs on offer for young people shed the light on phenome-na detected in the second narrative: the unjust prac-tices of Croatian employers. According to our parti-cipants, Croatian employers commonly recruit new workers in a non-transparent manner based on fa-vouritism, they do not respect contractual obligati-ons towards their employees and they often abuse temporary employment contracts and other types of flexible employment arrangements, they lack pro-fessionalism and business culture and they are not aware of what young employees have to offer.

2 The term “composition of focus groups” refers to the relation between focus groups with stu-dents and employed young people and the ones with unemployed and inactive young people.

19

Consequ-ences of unem-ployment (Chapter 7)

The consequences of unemployment are grouped in a typology presented in Table 3 on page (74). In the consequences narrative the participants differen-tiated between two dimensions. The first dimensi-on recognizes consequences on individual and soci-al levels. The second dimension is temporal: when speaking about consequences, the participants often differentiated between those linked to their present situation or immediate future and those which will be manifested in distant future. Through the eyes of an individual young person, youth unemployment corresponds to the theoretical concept of “existential affliction” which is manifested in short-term by diffe-rent types of psycho-physical problems, and in the long-term it has a negative impact on life chances of a young person. On the other hand, youth unem-ployment, according to our participants, contributes to a society which encourages a “race to the bottom”. In the short-term, this is manifested by a boiling so-cial discontent, which can become public in case that there are no concrete possibilities for positive social change. In the long-term, it is manifested by the loss of development potential in the society.

20

Obstacles to youth employment (Chapter 8)

The obstacles to youth employment were seen by the participants through three distinct perspectives which served as a basis for the development of a cla-ssification within this topic. This set of categories, unlike the one about the discourse, is founded on concrete obstacles experienced by the participants, and not on their perception or “secondary” sour-ces of information. The first category, which stems from the perspective of a young beneficiary of acti-ve employment policy measures, gives an overview of the problems in using three types of measures: on-the-job training without employment, different types of vocational and occupational training offe-red the Croatian Employment Service and incentives for employment of different categories of young pe-ople. Besides the perceived problems with individual elements of the aforementioned active employment policy measures, this category also encompasses the participants’ dissatisfaction with the implementati-on capacities of the Croatian Employment Service (CES). The second category, which stems from the perspective of a young job-seeker, is mostly built around the hypothesis that young people are not re-cognized as potential employees. According to the focus groups, this occurs most often because em-ployers insist on relevant work experience and due to the gap between acquired qualifications and ava-ilable jobs. The perspective (and the dissatisfaction) of highly-qualified unemployed participants predo-minated in this category. Finally, the third category stems from the perspective of a potential entrepre-neur and it highlights financial barriers to starting a business and obstacles during the first years of do-ing business. The participants also brought forth the lack of access to verified and relevant information and the lack of the entrepreneurial spirit in Croatia.

21

Support to young peo-ple in unem-ployment (Chapter 9)

The participants talked about the support in the pe-riod of unemployment through the lens of the level of fulfilment of their expectations. In this sense, it is possible to differentiate between ambivalent, unsa-tisfactory and empowering support. The ambivalent support is connected to the family and the peer group. A great majority of participants said that fa-mily can, at the same time, provide emotional and fi-nancial support, as well as exert psychological pre-ssure on a young unemployed person, insisting on quickly finding a job while disregarding current eco-nomic trends. On the other hand, the participants saw peer support much more in “black and white”. They perceive peers either as a source of encourage-ment and valuable information or merely as an addi-tional weight pulling them away from the “normal life”. The participants evaluate the support they get from CES as unsatisfactory, primarily due to the-ir perception that it does not provide its clients with “real support” but it merely “gets them through the system”. They also identified several additional pro-blems: unmotivated employees, irregular communi-cation with clients, some unadjusted procedures and the existence of favouritism and corruption in work. Although some participants take into consideration the limited capacities of the institution, it appears that most of them do not have a clear picture of what the purpose and the aims of CES really are. Projects and programmes of civil society organizations are seen as the empowering support, and the partici-pants point out a number of free time opportuniti-es they offer in the period of unemployment. Some recognize volunteering as a valuable mechanism for finding employment. However, the relevance of this category should not be taken unreservedly due to a possible bias of the sample which was dominantly re-cruited by civil society organizations. It should also be mentioned that most focus groups took place on the premises of our partner organizations.

22

About the chapter on recommen-dations and guidelines (Chapter 10)

The focus groups yielded a number of diverse re-commendations. Some of them are really concrete, whereas others serve as global guidelines in which direction to go towards solving a problem. This affec-ted the structure of the final chapter of this publica-tion. Unlike the usual presentation of recommendati-ons in clear and neat bullets, this chapter is similar to the rest of the publication, linking the recommenda-tions and guidelines in a coherent whole. Consequ-ently, the recommendations and guidelines are direc-ted towards:

Key recommen-dations (Chapter 10)

1) social change:-more young people involved in programmes and projects of civil society organizations, with a special emphasis on volunteering;-introduction of civic education in the formal educa-tion system;-affirmation of the position of young people as a di-stinct social group and creating better conditions for their development;-social orientation towards industrial production as a driving force of economic prosperity.

2) changes in the education system:-systematic and analytical approach to analysing outcomes in the labour market and informing young people when enrolling into schools and universities;-pro-active involvement of employers in the educa-tion system;-introduction of basic training on business skills;-educational institutions offer better support to their students in the process of finding employment.

23

3) improving the position of young people in the labour market:-promotion of volunteering and its clear distinction from other forms of unpaid work and internships;-employers recognize competences acquired through volunteering and different types of temporary work;-improving the quality of protection of young wor-kers’ rights;-affirming a correct business culture among em-ployers (professional communication with potential employees during selection procedure);-adjusting active employment policy measures to the real needs of young people;-eliminating the provision of necessary work expe-rience as a precondition for eligibility for unem-ployment benefits;-encouraging entrepreneurship among young people and removing barriers to starting a business.

4) improving support to unemployed young people:-comprehensive informing about opportunities offe-red by public, private and civil sectors (one stop shop approach);-using the full potential of the Internet for distribu-ting information about opportunities available to yo-ung people;-setting up agencies specializing in offering support to young people in the process of finding employment;-encouraging cooperation and networking of young entrepreneurs;-transforming services of CES from support in finding employment to support in the period of unemployment.

25

4. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT

4.1. The structured dialogue on youth employment in Croatia

Youth employment was the topic of the second 18-month cycle of the struc-tured dialogue at the European level in the period from January 2010 to June 2011. The cycle was implemented under the EU presidencies of Spain, Belgium and Hungary. According to the key described in the Foreword, the process was divided in three integral parts. In the first six months, under the Spanish presidency, the priorities of the structured dialogue on youth employment were identified and later agreed at a youth conference held in Spain in April 2010. Under the Belgian presidency, national consultations following the set priorities were implemented. Based on the results of the na-tional consultations, key fields of action were identified for all stakeholders involved in the structured dialogue and were presented at a conference held in Belgium in October 2010. The final phase saw the creation of recommen-dations for the next structured dialogue which were agreed at a conference in Hungary in April 2011 (Potočnik, 2011: 9-10). The fact that the topic of this structured dialogue is “in the news” due to a devastating effect the eco-nomic crisis of 2008 had on the position of young people at the labour mar-ket, only added to its importance and political weight.The structured dialogue at the national level in Croatia entered “through the back door”. This means that it was not a result of a wide consensus among stakeholders nor was it synchronized with the process that was go-ing on at the European level. Its implementation was a result of ad hoc ad-vocacy efforts of youth organizations, primarily of MMH, which made the structured dialogue on youth employment one of the measures in the Na-tional Employment Promotion Plan 2011-2012 (NEPP). The second impor-tant factor which made this process happen was the fact that the sub-ac-tion 5.1 of the Youth in Action programme became fully available to Croa-tian beneficiaries, and it is precisely this type of activities that it supports. MMH secured additional funding from the Youth in Action programme, without which this process, due to limited resources allocated in NEPP, could not have been so comprehensive and methodologically elaborated.

26

Besides the temporal incongruity with the European process, another specific feature of the Croatian structured dialogue was its relatively short period of implementation. Namely, it was carried out for the dura-tion of the Youth in Action financial support, from July 2011 till the end of June 2012. This posed before MMH a demanding challenge of imple-menting one of the most complex activities since its foundation in mere-ly eleven, instead of the foreseen eighteen, months.

4.2. The state of the Croatian labour market and the role of the structured dialogue

It seems, nevertheless, that the topic of the structured dialogue could not have been more relevant and up-to-date, taking into consideration the specific Croatian context. Already in early 2011 MMH tried to raise awareness about this growing problem by organizing a conference in Croatian Parliament entitled “Youth unemployment: a priority on the margins”. MMH warned that the situation only worsens due to an insuf-ficiently developed and porose social protection network and a signifi-cant gap between education and labour market. The following data from 2011 clearly demonstrate the severity of the problem:

1. In the period between 2003 and 2010 the average annual unem-ployment rate among young people aged 15-24 in EU-27 ranged between the lowest 15.7% in 2007 and the highest 21.1% in 2010. In the same period Croatia came close to the European numbers from 2008, when the average annual unemployment rate amount-ed to 21.9%. However, the next year saw the rate of 25.1%, and in 2010 it amounted to a staggering 32.6% (Eurostat, 2011).

2. This data clearly shows that Croatia, compared to EU-27, finds itself at the infamous top of the countries with the highest youth unemployment rates. According to Eurostat, in the first quar-ter of 2011, in comparison to the EU-27, Croatia had the sec-ond highest unemployment rate among young people aged 15-24. Spain was the only country with a higher rate (around 43%), Croatia and Greece held second place with around 38%, while Latvia lagged behind with a rate of 35%. For reference, the country with the lowest youth unemployment rate in Eu-

27

rope in the same period was the Netherlands with about 7% (Eurostat, 2011).2

3. The economic crisis hit the population aged 15-30 in Croatia much harder than other age groups. This claim can be substantiated by the data from the Croatian Employment Service which indicate that in the period between 2008 and 2010 the number of regis-tered employed persons aged 15-19 decreased by 45.8%, aged 20-24 by 26.9%, and aged 25-29 by 11.2%. By comparison, the only age group which has a two-digit rate of decline in the number of registered employed persons is the one exiting the labour market, aged 60-64. In this group the rate is 23.8% (Oračić, 2011).

Logically, these disturbing trends raised awareness of the public about the position of young people at the labour market. It appears that a num-ber of political decision-makers and experts began to comprehend po-tential detrimental effects, should these trends continue. However, the stakeholders which are most affected by this issue, young people them-selves, are largely excluded from the debate. The media brings from time to time sad stories of young people who, already in their early 20s, expe-rience long-term unemployment, and some showing willingness to per-manently leave the country3. Such examples, although useful as mecha-nisms for raising awareness of the public, assign young people primari-ly a role of “silent witnesses” or, worse, of powerless victims of the pro-found socio-economic crisis they live in. Apart from this, such media rep-resentations almost never offer solutions to current problems, thus giving very little hope to a huge proportion of the youth population.This structured dialogue, partly because of its purpose, and partly because of the aforementioned specific circumstances, had an extremely demand-ing challenge to overcome: how to turn young people into active agents in the process of solving the acute unemployment problem through creating relevant and sustainable solutions and recommendations.In order to resolve this issue, we decided to prioritize a method which is con-text-sensitive and allows for a deeper understanding of the problem, while at the same time encourages discussion with all interested stakeholders and contributes to the development of a democratic dialogue. The following par-agraphs give account of the methodology used in the implementation of the structured dialogue with young people at the national level.

3 One of the most memorable stories comes from the town of Prelog, where a young Croatian teacher decided to share in public her painful path towards the decision to leave Croatia per-manently and find a life elsewhere. The article is available at http://www.emedjimurje.hr/obrazovanje/zasto-sam-odlucila-reci-zbogom-hrvatskoj; 14.05.2012

28

4.3 Description of the methodology

With the purpose of encouraging the initiative of young people4 in solv-ing the problem of unemployment and including them in the process of creating sustainable solutions and recommendations together with de-cision-makers, both qualitative and quantitative approaches were em-ployed (multi-methods design). However, the two research methods were not integrated in one “result”, but both have different purposes and con-tributions to the project. The combined research methodology is used in order to obtain a clearer picture of the perspectives of unemployment which young people have in the Croatian social context.Besides this, the combination of qualitative and quantitative methodol-ogy is based on a logic that is pertinent to all research – it is important to use a method which “best suits the objectives”. Things get more chal-lenging when the process is not oriented towards a single goal and when goals are not exclusively research-related, as was the case here. The pro-cess attempted to open a channel which can bring the “youth voice” to the public and, at the same time, deepen the insights into potential paths towards a better social and political integration of unemployed young people. To realize these complex and, some would even say, contradicto-ry goals, we estimated that it is necessary to:

• deepen the understanding of the ways young people perceive the problem of unemployment in the Croatian context,

• recognize the obstacles which young people encounter in the pro-cess of finding employment,

• describe the experience of unemployment and its social/individu-al consequences.

Questions which directed the research were oriented towards the basic discourses about youth unemployment among the participants, the expe-rience and consequences of unemployment at the individual and social levels, expectations linked to the system of support in the period of un-employment, and recommendations how to solve the problem of youth unemployment or, at least, how to mitigate its consequences.

4 The youth population in this report refers to the 15-30 age group, according to the provisions of the National Programme for Youth 2009-2013.

29

The research process ran simultaneously in three phases:Online consultations were made up of a battery of questions which were used to collect information about:

• problems young people face at the labour market,• perception of the consequences of unemployment,• perception of the effects of the near EU accession on youth

employment, • perception of the actors responsible for the high unemployment

rate in Croatia. Data was collected through a questionnaire which was accessible to all vis-itors of the project website www.mladi-rade.net. The questionnaire was advertised via mailing lists and social networks, Facebook in particular, where it targeted specifically the population aged 15-30. The question-naire was available for three and a half months. The online consultations aimed at examining the perception of young people about youth unem-ployment and at involving as many young people as possible in the process of consultations. For a deeper understanding of youth perspectives, we re-lied on focus groups as a primary source of relevant information.

Consultations with employed/unemployed young people (focus groups) had two goals. One was to deepen the understanding of the problem of unemployment in the Croatian social context, starting from the perspective of young people. The other goal of the focus groups was to give voice to young people, assuming that by studying their specific perspective it is possible to gain valuable insights into potential mecha-nisms for a better social and political integration of unemployed young people. Focus groups were chosen as a particularly suitable method for this type of research which requires public participation. Bloor and his colleagues list three main reasons for this. Firstly, focus groups are “so-cial events” in the course of which respondents become participants in the event (this diminishes the feeling of intrusion in their privacy and makes their participation more acceptable (a/n). Secondly, they are de-fined by a limited duration, which makes them logically more accepta-ble in terms of time and other resources. Thirdly, they do not normally require from participants specific skills (Bloor et al., 2001: 12-13). Addi-tionally, same authors recognize a substantial democratic potential of fo-cus groups which is manifested in four main points. Firstly, they are con-sidered the ideal social medium though which the “community voice” can question the dominant expert opinions. Secondly, focus groups not only represent spaces for voicing opinions and group values, but also cre-

30

ate an interactive process which allows for them to change, reform and even to be created. Thirdly, focus groups often have a role which sur-passes (re)defining groups norms and values and can be real platforms for collective action. Finally, focus groups are a medium which can give research a participatory character, either in the preparation phase or in the course of implementation or evaluation (Bloor et al., 2001: 93).Consultations of participants with relevant stakeholders represent the third phase of the research process. The consultations were held after the focus groups and they involved a short conversation with represent-atives of relevant local stakeholders. Starting points for discussion were the recommendations created in the focus groups, and local experts had the task to provide feedback to the participants. Recommendations could then be revised, if necessary.

4.3.1. Discussion about the methodology – advantages and disadvantagesThe combination of qualitative and quantitative methods seemed a log-ical choice for eliminating the aforementioned tension between the two main expectations from the structured dialogue: to be open and struc-tured at the same time. Although a few subsequent chapters will be ded-icated to the reflection about the degree to which the research plan was realized, it is already the time to speak about several basic limitations of this study:

1. It is necessary to mention the relation between the data collected through the quantitative method (the online questionnaire) and the qualitative method (the focus groups). The fact that the ques-tionnaire was available to all who visited the project website led to the inability to control the sample and to validate it correctly. This influenced the external validity of the questionnaire results and it is not possible to claim that they are representative of the popula-tion which had the possibility to take part in the research. On the other hand, much effort was invested in designing and realizing an adequate sample for the focus groups and in the standardization of their implementation.

2. Focus groups, as well as any other research method, exhibit weak-nesses in their recruitment phase, implementation and analy-sis (Bloor et al., 2001: 15). However, if well implemented, focus groups can offer a profound and relevant cross-section of group thinking connected to a certain social phenomenon, and open up

31

a way to new research and socio-political processes. Outcomes of focus groups, regardless of the quality of their design and imple-mentation, do not represent opinions of a population/social group within which they were implemented. Therefore, the aforemen-tioned “youth voice” should be taken as a metaphor. But this does not mean that the results do not portray, to a significant degree, the spectrum of opinions of the youth population about the prob-lem of unemployment.

3. The partnership of the Croatian Youth Network and its member or-ganizations turned out to be extremely successful, particularly in the recruitment of the targeted participants and the overall organization of the focus groups. Clear instructions in the form of the Focus group participants’ recruitment protocol (Annex 2), which the partners re-ceived in a timely fashion, may have contributed to that as well. Al-though the Protocol minimized the effects of the recruitment process being carried out by civil society organizations, it should be noted that this kind of selection may have impacted descriptions of sever-al categories, particularly the ones which included discussions about the work of civil society organizations. The possibility of such impact was detailed in a concrete example in Chapter 9 wherein the support to unemployed young people is discussed.

4. It is important to point out that a small number of consultations with local stakeholders fulfilled their defined purpose. This is es-pecially true for groups with unemployed and inactive young peo-ple. In this case the conversations often would boil down to in-forming the participants about active employment policy meas-ures targeting youth, in spite of facilitators’ interventions, espe-cially in cases when the invited guests came from the Croatian Em-ployment Service. Besides this, guests often took ample time to ex-plain in detail the scope of work of CES and its purpose. Although the meetings with local stakeholders proved very useful for ob-serving the process of interaction and they provided valuable in-sight into the ways institutional stakeholders (particularly CES) communicate with young people, it should be noted that very few recommendations were created or revised through this addition-al consultative process. Therefore, the research team decided not to separate these recommendations because they are almost en-tirely identical to the ones created in the focus groups, and sever-al conclusions which are based on observing the conversations be-tween the stakeholders and participants are listed among the con-clusions of the study.

32

5. Finally, we would like to point out two important remarks regard-ing the chapter on recommendations. Some recommendations were really concrete, whereas others only point in the general direction towards solving the problem. This inconsistency was partly caused by a substantial heterogeneity of the groups and their relatively short duration. This brings us to another reason why the final chap-ter is structured the way it is. That part of the study was not writ-ten in clear and neat bullets, as it is customary in most papers. Here too we chose the “story” over comprehensiveness, attempting to link the recommendations in a sensible coherent whole, and taking care that the “linking logic” does not influence meanings of ideas brought forth by our participants.

4.4. Realized sample

4.4.1. Online questionnaireThe questionnaire was filled out by 1041 respondents, and it was availa-ble since early December till the end of March. The majority of respond-ents were aged 20-24 (52.93%), while 32.8% respondents were aged 25-30. The least proportion of respondents, 14.99%, belonged to the 15-19 age group. The sample was dominated by women (72.33%) in relation to men (27.67%).

Table 1: Sample of the online consultations respondents

SEX/GENDER

PLACE OF RESIDENCE POSITION AT THE LABOUR MARKET

Male 27.67%

rural area: 13.54% secondary-school student: 8.17%

Female 72.33%

small urban area (popu-lation less than 30.000): 19.31%

university-level student: 53.51%

big urban area (popula-tion more than 30.000): 15.18%

unemployed: 21.90%

33

macro-regional centre (Osijek, Rijeka, Split or Zagreb): 51.74%

employed: 16.43%

Integral results obtained by the questionnaire, and the questionnaire it-self, are presented in the publication in Annex 3. We would like to point out that some results were used in the introduction to the discussion of focus groups’ results. The questionnaire was developed through consul-tations with the National Working Groups and pre-tested.

4.4.2. Focus groupsYoung people are a very heterogeneous social group stratified by their so-cio-economic status, education, social network, etc; and they have very different starting positions when entering the labour market. However, despite the heterogeneity, Ilišin argues that “...young people are a social group which originated in the industrial society encompassing the popula-tion aged 15-30, to which the society…ascribes common social character-istics on the basis of which it defines its distinct social role and places it un-der a special social treatment…” (Ilišin, 1999: 69). Taking into considera-tion the heterogeneity of the youth population and the fact that this study does not aspire to speak about young people as a monolith group, this re-search principally tends to give answers to research questions posed from the perspectives of eight types of young people profiled in Table 2. How was the sample profiled in Table 2 constructed? Based on the anal-ysis of relevant factors which influence the position of young people at the labour market, the sample was defined and consulted with the Work-ing Group. Concretely, we considered that the perspective of a young person who completed primary or secondary education and has no work experience, should be different from the one of a young person who has university education, since previous research show that the level of ed-ucation tends to have a positive correlation with the prospects of young people at the labour market (Matković, 2009: 17-21). Similarly, we be-lieved that the focus groups could provide to inactive persons a space for sharing the reasons which let them to their status. We also thought that, within groups with employed persons and students, the perspective of a young student who is making his or her first steps towards the labour market might differ from the one of a “veteran” who, after a prolonged period of unemployment, managed to find a job (type 7).

34

When defining the criteria we made sure that they separated different types clearly enough, as well as created an adequate relation between group diversity and the possibility allowing the participants to have a constructive discussion. When designing the sample it was important to make the groups heterogeneous enough for creating a discussion-induc-ing atmosphere, and to allow for the participants to find connections with others so they could dare to fully participate (more on the issue of homogeneity/heterogeneity of focus groups in Finch/Lewis, 2003: 190). The research team, thus, had to meet the challenge of securing a suffi-cient level of homogeneity in the focus groups in order for an encour-aging group dynamics to develop. This goal was achieved by separating employed persons and students in one group and unemployed and inac-tive persons in another, assuming that the position at the labour market should function as a cohesive factor. Besides this, the process of selec-tion of the participants strived for gender-balanced groups5, which was achieved to a great extent. The summary of the realized sample is pre-sented in Scheme 1.

Table 2: Description of the realized sample and focus groups distribution

PARTICIPANT TYPE

DESCRIPTION FOCUS GROUP

TYPE 1 – partici-pants with low qualifications and no work experi-ence, actively looking for employment

m/f, aged 15-30, completed primary or secondary educati-on, unemployed, actively loo-king for employment, no work experience (officially recorded)

Unemployed and inactive

5 Although it is often stated that unemployment is not a sex/gender sensitive topic, there are significant differences in the factors which define positions of women and men on the labour market (for instance, parenting and child-care). In this respect, constructing gender-balanced focus groups attempted to eliminate the dominance of one of the gender’s perspec-tive on the topic.

35

TYPE 2 – participants with high qualifications and no work expe-rience, actively looking for employment

m/f, aged 15-30, comple-ted higher education, unem-ployed, actively looking for employment, no work experi-ence (officially recorded)


TYPE 3 – victims of the economic crisis

m/f, aged 15-30, has work experience, lost employment due to the economic crisis, education level irrelevant


TYPE 4 – partici-pants with fewer opportunities at the labour market

m/f, aged 15-30, unemployed, belongs to a group with fewer opportunities (Roma, disabled persons, persons leaving care, persons with criminal record...)


TYPE 5 – participants in education

student, m/f, aged under 25, desirably has some work expe-rience (part-time, student job)

Employed and students

TYPE 6 – participants found employment after a short search

m/f, aged 15-30, found em-ployment soon after (in up to 3 months) completion of educa-tion, education level irrelevant


TYPE 7 – participants found employment after a long search

m/f, aged 15-30, found em-ployment after a long search (more than a year), education le-vel irrelevant


TYPE 8 – participants inac-tive at the labour market

m/f, aged 15-30, inactive at the labour market


The towns where the focus groups took place were selected according to three main principles. First of all, the research design anticipated the possibility of examining differences in perceptions/experiences of young people residing in smaller or bigger areas, so the selection of the towns reflected this orientation. The research team also paid attention to the

36

territorial dimension so that the selected smaller towns are not situat-ed in the same county. Finally, it was also necessary to take into con-sideration capacities of local partners to implement complicated activ-ities which involved recruiting the participants and organizing the fo-cus groups.

The planned size and structure of the focus groups with employed per-sons and students was 6 participants, 3 male and 3 female. On the oth-er hand, the size and structure of the focus groups with unemployed and inactive persons was 9 participants with a desired male-female ratio 5:4 (or vice versa), which is in line with the recommended focus group size between 6 and 8 participants (Bloor et al., 2001: 26).Out of 16 planned groups, 13 were realized in the first attempt, while three focus groups with unemployed and inactive persons had to be or-ganized anew due to the fact that in the first attempt they did not meet the demands related to the number of participants.

CC

37

6 The organizers are committed to confidentiality in relation to all the participants of this consultation process. Therefore, the annex lists only the names of the institutions and not the names of persons who represented them in the consultations.

The duration of the focus groups was one and a half hours. They were fa-cilitated by a member of the MMH team, while the local partner provid-ed assistance in logistics and note-taking. Structurally, the focus groups had four stages:

1. discussion about factors which contribute to the high youth unem-ployment rate in the Croatian context,

2. discussion about obstacles which young people face in the process of finding employment,

3. discussion about experiences/consequences of youth unemploy-ment on individual/social level,

4. creating recommendations.The protocol which describes in detail the course of implementation of the consultations (focus groups and additional conversations) is present-ed in Annex 4, while all the stakeholders in different towns are listed in Annex 56.

39

5. SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS OF ONLINE CONSULTATIONSThe online consultations were carried out via a questionnaire which was available to all visitors aged 15-30 of the project website www.mladi-rade.net. This was a way they could voice their opinions about the po-sition of young people at the Croatian labour market. The questionnaire was completed by 1041 respondents, and it was available from Decem-ber till mid March. The sample realized in the online consultations was already described in the introduction. However, it is important to point out once again that the majority of respondents were students (53.51%), followed by unemployed persons (21%) and employed young people (16.43%). The online consultations focused on collecting general infor-mation about how young people perceive their and the position of their peers at the Croatian labour market. The complete questionnaire can be found in Annex 3, and this section brings a summary of the most interest-ing findings. In the process of online consultations, the participants had the opportunity to give their opinion on:

1. the position of young people at the labour market in relation to other age groupsRegardless of the high youth unemployment rates, according to 45.3% of participants in the online consultations, young people aged 18-30 still find employment relatively easier than persons aged 40-50, whereas 38.81% of respondents think that it is hard-er for young people to find employment than for the 30-40 age group. 59.9% think that young people find employment easier than those aged over 50. This perspective could be characterised as moderately optimistic, but it is necessary to take into account the fact that most participants were students and did not experi-ence challenges of the labour market.

2. the perception of causes of youth unemploymentAlthough it is possible to list numerous factors which contribute to youth unemployment, the participants were offered a choice of the most frequently cited arguments in the unemployment de-bate: quality of the Croatian education system, practice of under-estimating young experts, lack of entry-level and trainee positions,

40

quality of the Croatian labour legislation, unwillingness of em-ployers to invest in young people, unrealistically high expecta-tions of young people, and the lack of skills necessary for the la-bour market.A whopping 70% of young participants singled out the “unwill-ingness of employers to hire young people with no work experi-ence and to invest in their development” as the main cause of the high youth unemployment rate. 34.77% think that there are no jobs available for holders of a bachelor’s degree, while 34.68% pointed out that the “Croatian education system is of low quality and does not equip students with the knowledge and skills neces-sary for successfully performing job-related tasks”. This distribu-tion of answers indicates that young people perceive employers and the education system as relevant factors for the problem of unemployment. Therefore it is not surprising that 55.04% of par-ticipants think that more job-related training in the course of edu-cation would help young people find employment more easily, as well as incentives to employers for hiring young people (53.51%). It is disconcerting that 56.48% of participants see favouritism as an important factor in landing a job in Croatia, while relevant work experience follows at 37.85%, as well as skills and compe-tences necessary for performing job-related tasks (34.87%).

3. the perception of actors responsible for the high unemployment rate in CroatiaAs the most responsible actors for the high unemployment rate in Croatia, young people identify the national government (73.10%), employers (34.68%) and local governments (31.99%).

4. the perception of the influence of the near EU accession on youth employmentThe participants have relatively optimistic views about the in-fluence of the EU accession on their prospects for employment. Namely, 44% of participants think that their situation at the la-bour market will improve, 33.24% think that the EU accession will not affect their employment prospects, while 22.74% voice their concern that it will bear negative impact on their chances for employment. On the other hand, 43.13% of participants assess their knowledge on EU opportunities as average, 36.79% assess it as unsatisfactory, and only 20.08% as satisfactory. Furthermore, the participants estimate positively the opportunity to travel and work abroad, and they think that the acquired expertise will con-

41

tribute to the development of Croatia (52.7%). It is interesting that exactly the same percentage of participants recognize as threat a potential mass emigration of educated young people from Croatia to more developed EU countries (52.7%). This distribution of an-swers points to an ambivalent opinion about opportunities to work abroad. The presented data offer only an indicative insight into the opin-ions and attitudes of a very heterogeneous social group which in this study we call “youth”. Following chapters will bring findings based on the data collected in the focus groups, which provide better foundations for a more profound understanding of the way young people in Croatia think about unemployment.

43

6. YOUTH UNEMPLOYMENT – A VIEW FROM WITHINUnemployment is so widely spread and its consequences indisputably greatly affect the opinions and the worldview of today’s young generation. A great many people today are out of work. A great many people experienced long-term unemployment and had the opportunity to get to know well the system of state intervention directed at people who find themselves in such a position. Many of them are affected by the working status of their parents or guardians, who themselves often fail to avoid devastating consequences of unemployment and/or precariousness, which have spread their tentacles over the entire (Croatian) economy. Some young people finish their educa-tion and, after observing the current situation at the labour market, intensely explore different strategies which could lead them to their desired outcomes, and the economic context unavoidably influences them to (re)define their expectations. If they have a job, there is a big probability that have tempo-rary employment contracts or some other type of flexible employment ar-rangement. The uncertainty of employment, frequently combined with jobs outside one’s profession or below the acquired qualification level, and the use of active employment policy measures greatly correspond to the descrip-tion of the concept of “intermediary zone”. The United Nation’s World Youth Report from 2003 points out that young people who find themselves in this zone get stranded “...between the worlds of employment and unemploy-ment”, and warns that the rise of the number of young people in this ever-growing zone is becoming a global trend (2003: 55). We believe that this study reflects to a great extent the influence of this trend on young people in Croatia, and that it highlights specific features of the “Croatian case”.

It would certainly be too harsh to claim that no other generation ever has been under such economic strain like the one which is currently entering the labour market or is at the very start of their professional life. Howev-er, it is certainly safe to say that today’s young people live in challenging, if not difficult times. It is also safe to presume that the influence which un-employment has on their lives has yielded an extremely rich array of ex-periences, opinions and social patterns which we will try to present in this study. This presentation, which we will attempt to make as systematic and readable as possible, is mainly built around quotations from the focus groups’ participants. So in order to fully understand this study, it is impor-tant to understand the participants of the focus groups. We invite you to

44

examine their profiles once more and to think about the specific perspec-tives which were their starting points for discussion. Try to get inside their skin and see the reality we are about to enter through their eyes. You will be encouraged to do so also by the manner in which this part of the study is written. It mostly takes participants’ positions as starting points and tries to eliminate potential “pollution” in the form of author’s experiences, sub-jective perceptions and emotions. The goal of this part of the study is to contribute to a better understanding of the framework in which the partic-ipants position the problem of youth unemployment.

6.1. Sketching a portrait – supporting pillars of a phenomenon

Although this reference may be applicable to a certain degree to the en-tire study, this chapter, more than others, owes its origins to an inter-pretative analytical approach to public policies, characteristic to Dvora Yanow, for instance. She says that one of its strong characteristics is the focus on clarifying any vague issues which may arise in the course of in-terpretation of the same phenomena, structures and processes in different policy arenas. This mission is especially important in cases when differ-ences in interpretation are not explained in everyday discourse (Yanow, 2007: 408). Our task is to examine thoroughly the meanings which young people assign to some of the structures and processes linked to the issue of youth unemployment, while trying to comprehend why discrepancies among participants arise (if they arise). We can then, on the basis of our conclusions, think about implications for creating public policies which have the capacity to adequately meet the challenges posed by the prob-lem of youth unemployment. Our focus here is on the participants’ gen-eral opinions about unemployment, whereas their concrete experiences occupy later chapters.The analysis of the focus groups detected five dominant meta-stories which are used by the participants to explain how different actors, struc-tures and processes affect the problem of youth unemployment. The me-ta-stories developed due to the fact that the participants looked at the problem from several different points of view which make up the entire picture. Each meta-story is connected to specific social constructs which link individual meta-stories into a whole. On the other hand, the meta-

45

stories combine different facets of the unemployment phenomenon into a unique and relatively coherent picture.For the purpose of this study, we decided to call these meta-stories ba-sic discourses. In this study, a discourse denotes a loosely defined con-text in which a discussion is positioned. This understanding comes close to the definition of American post-structuralism philosopher Judith But-ler who says that discourse is “…the limit of acceptable speech or possi-ble truth” (Butler, 1997). In this sense, the basic discourses described in this text refer to the scope of meaning which the participants use when talking about youth unemployment. It is possible that a single discourse harbours conflicting meanings which different sub-groups assign to the same aspect of unemployment. The goal of the analysis is to identify ar-eas where interpretations of the same phenomenon match or conflict.A discourse is shaped by its narratives. Narratives are also stories but they are marked by a lower level of abstraction and their focus on mech-anisms and processes (real or imagined) which lead to the current image of a phenomenon. Regardless of the complexity of the term (see for in-stance: Bell, 2002), in this study a narrative is a concrete story which tells a bigger story (in this case, a basic discourse).It is interesting to note that a single basic discourse can be made of more “different” narratives. In this case the discrepancy is not content-relat-ed, since it is precisely the content which serves as the main criterion for (sub-)categorisation. However, it happens that in some instances one narrative may be fluid and quite general, whereas another narrative in-side the same basic discourse is much more concretely linked to a phe-nomenon or an institution. Some appear to be closely linked to unem-ployment, while others probably would never find their place in this pro-cess had the structured dialogue been more structured. Despite all our ef-forts, it was not possible to approach our analysis in any other manner. Ways in which young people think about many problems, and this in-cludes unemployment, are not always susceptible to neat analytical for-mats, which will be visible throughout this study. Nevertheless, we think that this is precisely where the strength of this study lies, particularly of the part summarized in this chapter. We tried to be consistent in our un-derstanding of the logic behind young peoples’ opinions about different topics, and we gave our best not to predetermine topics through our fa-cilitation plan, as well as in the accompanying analysis.We will try to present participants’ perceptions of unemployment through the position of a young person entering the labour market. He or she no-tices that his/her position is shaped by many influences which make up different systems. These systems are categorized as our basic discours-

46

es. Narratives should be understood as descriptions of how these systems function, which, in turn, give a complete picture of the phenomenon of unemployment. It is interesting that our participants point out that the problem does not appear (only) at the moment when a young person en-ters the labour market. Which forces determine the fate of young people even before this crucial moment?

6.2. The state of education or of weak foundations7

TYPE 2: With my 5 years of studying law… I come to the office and it’s like I’ve never even heard of law. Because the practice is totally different from the theory. Actually, to me... Everybody’s telling me the same. After a year or so you’re still learning the ropes. You have to start from scratch. So what caus-es this problem? How this came to be? It’s this low-quality education system which is totally unadjusted. Rijeka, unemployed and inactive

The conclusion brought to us by our university-educated unemployed participant from Rijeka sets the foundation for our first basic discourse which is connected to education. Until they enter the labour market, yo-ung people are primarily marked by education. Besides teaching them how to behave and function in society, education should also equip yo-ung people with a set of tools necessary for the “world out there”. So how successful is it in doing so? If we judge by what our participant in Rije-ka said, education does not necessarily give young people a good star-ting position.The state of the education system is definitely recognized as one of the basic discourses which participants connect to the problem of unem-ployment. But what are its key determinants and how do the participants understand its inherent logic?

7 The quotations in this study underwent minimal content-related interventions. Most alterati-ons refer to shortening and eliminating unnecessary parts, like sighs or buzzwords. The quota-tions are not proof-read. We wanted to retain their authenticity and bring closer to the reader the youth perspective, which is greatly influenced by the language used by this social group.

47

6.2.1. Transfer of competencies for the labour market

TYPE 6: The education system probably has its fair share in it. I mean, peo-ple graduating from universities, most universities, aren’t qualified. They are not ready for work.TYPE 7: Why aren’t they qualified? If they finished university.TYPE 6: Because the university doesn’t offer them any sort of practical work.FACILITATOR: Ok.TYPE 7: You mean they’re not motivated enough… The entire education system is…TYPE 6: No, no... I mean they’re not educated well enough.TYPE 5: Sure. All they offer is theoretical approach. They don’t have a single day of practical work, which... A guy who graduated in economics, especial-ly in economics... this doesn’t mean that you know how to do your job. An-ybody can graduate in economics nowadays. It’s all about cramming. When you graduate, you’re not required to know how to do anything. And you’ll know absolutely nothing about business. And I finished university with seven top grades. Karlovac, employed and students

Like in Karlovac, participants from different focus groups, especially in bigger towns, share the opinion that a significant proportion of young peo-ple finish their education without the required skills, attitudes, knowledge and other personal characteristics needed for successfully performing job-related tasks in the modern economy. In brief, the participants warn that our education system does not necessarily transfer the required compe-tences. They link this to a series of characteristics of the education sys-tem. They warn about the “lowering standards”, which some relate to the primary education “which everybody must complete”, whereas for others (particularly students) the problem of the lowering standards is linked to the “Bologna”8 which, in their opinion, merely “produces“ graduates, not unlike the way described by a student from Rijeka:

8 The term refers to the process of harmonisation of the Croatian higher-education system with the requirements of the Bologna declaration, which the Croatian government adopted in 2001 and started implementing in the academic year 2005/2006.

48

TYPE 5: They lowered the bar a lot. I, for one, started studying in the old..., actually not in the old system, but the first Bologna, which was a kind of a mix of the old system and the Bologna. I will finish under the new Bologna, and I had these two courses and it was... Everything actually depends on the teach-er. And the department, of course. But, all in all, too many experts are pro-duced with too little knowledge. Rijeka, employed and students

The “Bologna” also has not lived up to its promises about employability of holders of a bachelor’s degree, whose prospects at the labour marked are painted rather grimly by our participants. They are dissatisfied be-cause the educational institutions they attend, or attended, do very little to secure practical job-related training, and when they do its quality is described as questionable, at best, because it does not provide real oppor-tunities for acquiring relevant expert knowledge. It is also possible to detect dissatisfaction with the quality of teaching staff. The participants often relate this to the fact that this profession is unde-restimated in Croatia. Moreover, according to the participants, the educa-tion system is not void of corruption and favouritism, which leads to the fact that many students get a diploma without acquiring real competences. However, the participants acknowledge that the problem does not lie en-tirely in the education process. They notice that many of their peers who have qualifications in certain areas find it difficult to get employment, regardless of the level of their competences, which is discussed in the following paragraphs.

6.2.2. (Un)adjusted enrolment quotasThe choice of a profession, our participants claim, will greatly determine the fate of a young person at the labour market:

TYPE 7: Regarding the education system, it’s safe to say that enrolment quo-tas are really high. ‘Cause, they keep saying there’re no jobs. But, if Croatian te-achers are having a hard time finding a job in Slavonija and Baranja, then why do they keep enrolling 100 Croatian language students each year. Why?! Where are they going to work?! There’re no jobs. This is no longer an employers’ issue. People can’t retire at a rate at which new graduates are produced. Literally. They have to shrink the quotas… Osijek, employed and students

49

The narrative about enrolment quotas, which was also more present in focus groups in bigger towns, highlighted two main dimensions. The first one relates to opinions about the reasons why educational institutions enrol “too big” a number of students who have difficulties in getting a job after graduation. The prevailing perception of the reason why this happens is the fact that this is often the main source of funding for nu-merous educational institutions, and this primarily refers to universities. Additionally, it is widely accepted that educational institutions in Croa-tia demonstrate a very low level of responsibility for their students’ fu-ture prospects, and they often do not disclose the “real truth” about em-ployability of certain professions.Another important dimension of the quotas narrative is connected to the debate about the core function of education, where it is possible to iden-tify two conflicting approaches. The first one leans towards a “market-oriented” solution:

TYPE 3: Although I would like to point out the “low-quality and unadjusted education system”. In my opinion we should definitely have a planned educa-tion. ‘Cause there’re too many economists and other professions that are not in demand. I think this should be balanced somehow. TYPE 3: They should shrink the quotas…TYPE 3: Yeah, definitely. Sorry. We need this and this number of workers, so we will plan and educate this and this number of young people. Pula, unem-ployed and inactive

Interestingly, the focus groups in big towns often formulated a different set of opinions:

TYPE 5: I think that, because of the high unemployment, we somehow have forgotten what the primary function of education is. Educational institutions don’t exist to employ young people but to educate them, and we all should have a right to education. This is our constitutional and democratic right. And also our right to choose freely what to study. It’s true, there’re too many law-yers and economists, both male and female. But at the end of the day, if that’s what they want to study, then they should be allowed to. Split, employed and students

50

The conflicting opinions are at the very core of the dilemma of whether the education system should be adapted to market demands and to what extent. Regardless of the opposing views, the current state is perceived mainly as unsustainable and damaging to future generations leaving the education system.

***The state of education was a topic recognized mainly by participants in bigger towns. They generally singled out the unsatisfactory transfer of relevant competencies and unadjusted enrolment quotas to the current needs of the labour market. But are there additional factors which affect young people even before they enter the labour market? According to our participants, there are, and somewhat surprisingly, they refer to spe-cific characteristics of young people as a social group.

6.3. Young people as a social group: (un)fit for challenges of time

Young people have always been a demanding social group, for resear-chers, as well as those whose task is to answer their needs through the-ir public engagement. Often it is possible to hear arguments that, due to their heterogeneity, young people do not make up a separate social gro-up, but merely a segment of population defined by an age limit.So it is interesting to see that in most cases the participants did not hesi-tate to think about young people as a separate social group with its spe-cific characteristics:

TYPE 5: It’s just that these people are totally disinterested…TYPE 6: There’s no willingness.TYPE 5: Eighty percent of young people in Croatia are totally disinterested, just waiting for something to fall off the sky.TYPE 7: And these people don’t want to work, get it?TYPE 5: They don’t want to work. They get 600 Kuna of social benefits. Eno-ugh for going out with mates.

51

FACILITATOR: Are there many young people like this? Marija, you wanted to say something?TYPE 5: They’re looking for a job, but at the same time praying to god that they don’t find it. They’re just looking for excuses.TYPE 5: Yeah.FACILITATOR: Tell me more about this frame of mind. What do you think how this happens?TYPE 5: They know they should find a job but they’re not determined enou-gh. They’re bothered by all this application-writing…TYPE 6: This might’ve been true before, but not anymore. People nowadays are really looking for a job but they can’t find it. A friend of mine applied to more than 30 positions last month and he can’t find a job. Knin, employed and students

Discussions like this were quite common in a many focus groups, especi-ally those with employed young persons and students. It is also very in-teresting to note the way the participants in the above quotation, when speaking about young people – a social group they belong to as well, actually describe unemployed young people. As we are about to see, wit-hin this discourse, “young people” are predominantly described in nega-tive colours which points to the existence of a certain stigma which is closely linked to the status of (long-term) unemployment.

6.3.1. Mentality of (unemployed) young peopleMentality of (unemployed) young people is recognized as a relevant the-me which is often linked by our participants, particularly employed per-sons and students, with the problem of unemployment. The term menta-lity, according to the Farlex online dictionary, denotes:

1. the state or quality of mental or intellectual ability;2. a way of thinking; mental inclination or character.

The way our participants understand mentality encompasses both defi-nitions, although they tend to emphasize the second one – a “frame of mind” by which unemployed young people contribute to their own diffi-cult position. The following paragraphs will portray the most relevant

52

elements of the mentality of (unemployed) young people, as seen prima-rily by our employed participants and students.

It appears that a big chunk of the problem stems from what some partici-pants consider unreal expectations:

TYPE 6: Well, OK. Don’t do the job. But then don’t complain that you’re unemployed and there’s no work. No. Don’t say that. ‘Cause we all need some motivation, or like he said, we need someone to bring everything on a platter. Someone should come and promise him, “Listen, you work like this for six months and then I’ll give you a raise.” In this case he might take it on. But why not just get going? ‘Cause you have no job? ‘Cause you complain all the time? Well, you should just get going. Nobody ever went from university di-rectly to the top. Nobody.FACILITATOR: Of course.TYPE 5: There was this interesting survey done at The Faculty of Engineering and Computing in Zagreb. They asked a group of juniors, one year till gradua-tion, what they expected. This Faculty has (...) one of the strongest in Croatia, even comparable to abroad, for its students. They get offered jobs right after graduation. Anyways, this survey they did, most of the students thought they would get executive positions right away, minimum 2000 euro salaries, com-pany cars, planes, condos... And who knows what else. Rijeka, employed and students

Besides the problem that many young people persist in the paradigm of a “secure and well-paid job”, the participants also identified other nega-tive traits. They perceive them as lazy, lacking in initiative, being used to somebody else “fixing them a job”, and likely to shift the responsibi-lity to “others”. They always expect a tad more than they realistically can get, thus often legitimizing the attitude that there are no “right jobs”. The participants detected more problems: young people are not risk-takers, they tend to give up easily on their goals and they lack awareness about their own future prospects. Employed persons and students often pointed out that the culture of public service is not very prominent among young people in Croatia which contributes to the fact that they are not able to articulate their needs in a manner which could lead to positive change. Often they are not aware of the need for continuing education which can negatively affect their competitiveness.

53

This type of opinion certainly did not remain uncontested. This is what an employed participant from Zagreb had to say about it:

FACILITATOR: Mhm. Young people are inactive. (WRITING DOWN)TYPE 6: I’d like to, this... complaint. I’ve heard a lot about this compla-int that young people are inactive, but I don’t think it’s universally true. ‘Cau-se I think there’re some young people who are inactive and would be inactive one way or the other. Just like there’re inactive children or inactive adults. I think it’s more about disappointment, when you finish university you don’t get a chance to work in your profession. It doesn’t have to be extremely well-paid, but at least paid enough so you don’t feel totally under-valued doing a job. Zagreb, employed and students

Does the described “mentality” refer to most of unemployed young people or to a minority of them? Is there such a thing like the “mentality of young people” which contributes to their socio-economic position? How is it that some young people are aware of it, others are not, and some even deny it? Although this study does not offer explicit answers to these questions, we believe that following chapters offer them a clearer context.

6.3.2. The influence of the starting point on available opportunitiesWe have already mentioned the issue of young peoples’ unrealistic expectations and placed it within the mentality narrative. However, is it only the mentality which influences the readiness of young people to “adjust” their expectations? A valuable opinion comes from Pula:

TYPE 7: I would work. I mean, I’ve had all sorts of jobs in my life. Really, everything. I would work, of course. I mean, if I had a kid, I’d drop out of uni-versity, drop out of everything, and go and work in a supermarket.TYPE 6: OK, but say you don’t have a kid, say you graduate and start loo-king for a job and…TYPE 7: I’d do the same for sure. I would. I wouldn’t wait for 5 years, I’d work somewhere else. I’d go there and say OK …TYPE 6: Yeah, but most people with a university diploma say, “A supermar-ket? No way. It’s like…”

54

TYPE 7: No. It’s not like I’m categorical about it, I don’t take it as a life goal. It’s only…TYPE 6: Temporary, till you find something better. Pula, employed and students

Most participants recognize other circumstances which influence the choice of strategies that young people might employ when they enter the labour market. Their common denominator might be the “starting point”, which, besides the responsibility for children and family quoted above, refers to many other factors. A young person, according to our participants, is greatly conditioned by his or her community. A level of collective solidarity encourages famili-es to support their unemployed members, which may lead to the lack of initiative to find employment. On the other hand, growing up in a family which values and nurtures individual responsibility may encourage a yo-ung person to keep his or her expectations realistic. Place of residence is also factored as an important element of “community”. The participants often note that bigger towns offer more opportunities for young people, but also that living in bigger areas is not equally available to everyone:

TYPE 3: I’ve thought about it already. But if I get paid there 4000 Kuna, that’s not enough for a living.FACILITATOR: Mhm.TYPE 3: It’s barely enough for a mere survival. And it’s still a burden to my parents. It’s like I’m still a student, when they used to support me. It’s not so-mething I see for myself.FACILITATOR: I see.TYPE 3: I’ll never get work experience, have a great job with a pay that’s eno-ugh for getting by. Realistically, that’s not happening. Slatina, unemployed and inactive

Additionally, the availability of opportunities for young people is often con-ditioned by the degree of education and work experience. The participants notice that a higher degree of both tends to result in less willingness to accept sub-standard employment outside one’s profession. Finally, corruption and favouritism are also recognized as relevant factors which guide young people’s decisions. If there is hope that a job may be “fixed”, young people are more likely to wait longer for a job they “deserve”.

55

6.3.3. (Ir)relevance of job-searching skillsDiscussions about skills required for job-searching, and to which extent they can affect young peoples’ prospects at the labour market, were of-ten very heated and dynamic. This narrative was most present in groups with employed persons and students organized in bigger towns. In most cases, the debate about job-searching skills produced a very interesting polarisation, often among participants in a same group. One side is pre-sented by our participants from Split:

TYPE 5: Young people don’t really get the need for continuing education. This attitude “I don’t need a resume. I don’t want to write it...” This is a problem for our future economy, ‘cause this is something that will be… These young people will be on our backs, ‘cause soon they will no longer be young. And they will soon become the people whom we will have to feed, we who work. Maybe this is not really an OK attitude... But having 20-25 years and thin-king that you don’t need a resume ‘cause nobody’s going to look at it anyway. Maybe it’s not too…TIP 6: Optimistic. Split, employed and students

Some participants argue that many young people do not use enough the available job-searching tools and this has a negative impact on their prospects at the labour market. It is also interesting that this opinion pre-dominates among the participants who have not fully entered the labour market. However, they also recognize that there is another side to the story about job-searching tools. The main protagonist of the above quo-tation, a student from Split, when asked to which degree can the skills actually help when there are very few jobs available, considered the li-mitations of this factor:

TYPE 5: I know this person who, in the last three months, sent her resume to, like, 150 addresses, by mail and e-mail. She got some 20 automatic e-mail re-plies and maybe 2 proper e-mails. They said they’re not currently looking for anyone. Split, employed and students

However, some participants go even further in rejecting job-searching skills as a relevant factor in today’s conditions. A student from Zagreb formulates his position by questioning the relevance of job-searching skills, using the current state of economy as his argument:

56

FACILITATOR: Yes, yes. But what do you think? How do the rest of you un-derstand this argument?TYPE 6: That young people in Croatia don’t know how to look for a job?FACILITATOR: Yes.TYPE 5: It’s one very lousy excuse of those who are supposed to be responsi-ble for... That young people can prosper. It’s purely rhetoric…FACILITATOR: So you don’t think at all that some skills are important in helping a person find a job?TYPE 5: Maybe in some other circumstances...FACILITATOR: Which other circumstances? TYPE 5: If there were more jobs available. More ways to find a job. In our case, you can look all you want and have all the high quality standards in the world, but you’re not going to find a job. Zagreb, employed and students

Job-searching skills – a relevant factor or just another mechanism for shifting responsibility to young people for their difficult position: this is the range of opinions of our participants in the focus groups. Neverthele-ss, this part will be very interesting in relation to the section of the stu-dy which focuses on obstacles, where very few participants of the focus groups with unemployed and inactive persons recognize their insuffici-ent skills as a significant barrier to their future employment! All creators of current and future active employment policy measures should defini-tely pay attention to this fact.

***Young people enter the labour market from different starting points, with a more or less adequate set of tools acquired through different kinds of education. Although we tried to direct the discussion towards the topic of the “labour market”, the participants often managed to broaden the concept and speak about the problem of youth unemployment in the con-text of “Croatian economic conditions”. The following paragraphs offer a view of how young people perceive economic prospects and their influ-ence on youth unemployment.

57

6.4. Croatian economic conditions: a pessimistic diagnosis

By the term “economic conditions” in this study we refer to the general “health” of the Croatian economy, which the participants consider im-portant for young peoples’ prospects at the labour market. Our partici-pants’ “diagnosis” is related to the general state of economy which is re-flected on the labour market. However, the most commonly recognized element of the labour market refers to employers’ practices, which our participants often see as unjust. This was the basis for the second domi-nant narrative of this discourse.

6.4.1. The general state of economy“Croatia is not currently in crisis; Croatia is permanently in crisis”, says one group of participants ironically describing the economic conditions in Croatia. It appears that they share this view with Ivo Družić, profe-ssor at the Faculty of Economics and Business in Zagreb, who warns that in 2010 Croatia had some 200000 less employees then in the mid 80s (Družić, 2012: 88). Družić also claims that this loss should be seen in the context of a wider trend of a stabilization policy which, from the early 80s on, has limited the growth of the Croatian economy. This trend has led not only to a negative average annual rate of employment growth of -0.04% in the period between 1980 and 2010, but it also has changed the employment structure – there has been a significant loss in jobs in sectors which produce added value. This loss has been substituted (parti-ally) by an increased employment in the national and local governments, which mainly only redistributes this added value (Družić, 2012: 98). The participants of the focus groups belong to a generation which is perhaps too young to remember the times before the reduction of the Croatian production potential, but they can very well see its remnants and speak about it with a certain melancholy:

TYPE 3: Let’s see. Let’s stick to the numbers. Đuro Đaković [a steel factory], 15000 employees. OLT [a steel factory], how many? Let’s say ten thousand. (…) DIN from Đurđenovac [a wood-processing plant]. The entire town will die out because of it. When we look at it realistically, what is there in Đur-

58

đenovac? Three stores. And where do we get the money to shop in these sto-res? What else do we have? These are some of the biggest factories in the re-gion which employed some 50-60-70 thousand people. When you look at it, it’s basically the entire population of Osijek. If they worked. The 4 factories. Just look at it: leather production, the matches factory, all gone, like you said. Osijek, unemployed and inactive

TYPE 7: Karlovac is a very interesting town in this respect. I think it used to be one of the most industrialized towns in Yugoslavia. Everything was here. There was the army; one part was here because of the army. But people stayed here because of work. I mean, take Jugoturbina [a pumps and engines fac-tory], for example. People worked in three shifts. It took 40 buses to transport people to work in a single shift. So, how many people is that. In just one shift. Plus the people who drove their own cars. This company issued a world stan-dard. It is still used nowadays. And I don’t even have to speak about its quali-ties. I don’t understand why, regardless of the situation in Croatia, we couldn’t sustain something the entire world appreciated… ŽČ was the world’s only pro-ducer of nails for... For horses... For horse shoes. And it also went bust. What, there’re no more horses in the world? Karlovac, employed and students

Similar opinions were present in most focus groups, regardless of the size of the town or the employment status of the participants, which only adds to their importance. But does everybody think that the loss of industrial production necessarily means fewer jobs? It appears not. Some think that jobs are there and the problem lies somewhere else:

FACILITATOR: So what do you, young hopes, think?TYPE 5: For instance, unemployment is sky-high in the country so young pe-ople... But that’s not true, there are jobs available. Maybe not in your profe-ssion. If you graduate, maybe you’re not going to find a job in your professi-on. But there’re jobs for sure. It’s true. I go to the Employment Service every month. Slatina, employed and students

Nevertheless, most participants think that there are no jobs. They point out that obtaining a diploma in professions which up until recently me-ant a “secure” job, is no longer a guarantee that a young person will not go through the experience of prolonged unemployment. They also note that the reality of the Croatian labour market is such that even (very) po-orly paid jobs are often unavailable to young people:

59

TYPE 1: I was once at an interview for a job. It was me and two other people, 40 year-olds. The pay was 1800 Kuna. It was ridiculous to me that the enti-re country was in this situation. That I and two 40 year-olds should fight over a 1800-kuna job. It’s absolutely absurd. Split, unemployed and inactive

But it seems that this is not the only “absurdity” which our participants relate to the general state of the Croatian economy. As an example, we provide an intervention by an employed participant from Rijeka who thinks that the upcoming pensions reform will not bring anything good to young people who are about to enter the labour market:

FACILITATOR: Mario, what do you mean when you say politics? Explain it to me a bit.TYPE 6: Well, firstly, young people are looking for jobs, right? But they keep raising the retirement age. There’s no shift. There’re no people who would re-tire and leave their positions to young people to prove themselves there or so-mewhere else. Like Linić [the current finance minister] recently said, “If So-cial Democrats win the elections, the retirement age goes up to 67 years.” He blurted this out in public. And that’s it. He thinks it’s great. But it’s not great. It’s not great because the longer you keep older people employed, there will be less jobs for young people. OK, there’ll always be work. Maybe, I don’t know, today is... Today it’s really awful because of this problem. And it really is a problem. Because if you keep a person, for example, in 3. Maj [a shipyard in Rijeka]... They ask 65 year-olds, who have the right to retire, who are ready for it, “Do you want to retire?” “No, I want to keep working.” Rijeka, em-ployed and students

It appears that young people’s specific perspective allows them to differen-tiate between “short-term and long-term”. They warn that some short-term moves can cause negative consequences in future, in the same manner that ignoring the need for urgent intervention in relation to those which focus on future development, may have negative impacts on the Croatian eco-nomy. In any case, the current state of economy is perceived as desperate, and it is somewhat surprising that the narrative about the importance of industrial production is so wide-spread among the participants who, accor-ding to conventional opinion, live in a “post-industrial society”.

60

6.4.2. (Unjust) practices of Croatian employersThe participants, regardless of the town size and the focus group they participated in, are generally dissatisfied by practices of Croatian em-ployers. They primarily criticize frequent non-transparent recruitment practices which refer to employee selection based on favouritism, whe-re the key factors still remain family relations and political connections. They also note that advertising a job does not always imply a sincere will of an employer to hire the best candidate and that criteria often get tai-lored to meet the profile of an already selected candidate:

TYPE 6: Firstly, in 90 percent of advertised job vacancies it’s questionable if anyone ever gets the job, ‘cause they want someone particular to take the job immediately. It’s not necessarily the connections, I mean, I would do the same if I worked in a company and I knew this somebody’s kid who has a degree I need. And I’ve known this kid, I’ve known him for five-six years. So I take this kid and I don’t advertise the job. And all these vacancies, they have all sorts of weird conditions, like 17-month work experience. So weird, so it’s...TYPE 5: Clear that it’s fixed.TYPE 7: Everything’s clear right away. Rijeka, employed and students

The “list of sins” which the participants attribute to Croatian employers is varied and comprehensive, and most refer to various ways of “cutting corners” on the expense of one’s own employees. The list features the practice of deceiving employees who are lead to believe that all the taxes and benefits related to their employment are being paid, when in fact they are not; and frequent cases of employees not being paid their wages regularly. All this often happens with a taciturn blessing of the state which keeps tolerating such practices. The participants also note that Croatian employers tend to (ab)use temporary employment contracts and other types of flexible employment arrangements (in line with the current European trends). The following quotation almost perfectly des-cribes the aforementioned intermediary zone concept and the role of the employer in its creation (and spreading):

TYPE 6: When he graduated he got a job in a company. He worked for pe-anuts. After 10 months he got a new job and moved on. A bigger salary, of course. They gave him a new contract. For the duration of 3 months. Great. He came there and he said to himself, “I have to work hard to prove myself.”

61

This makes sense, so he could get a permanent job. After 3 months, they gave him a new contract, again for 3 months. And he says, “This money that I get, with all the work that I do, it’s simply not enough. I stay overtime. Sometimes I have 3 hours overtime a day. I work weekends. Sometimes they call me du-ring the night. For an intervention or something.” So after the six months they gave him a new 1-month contract. Osijek, employed and students

Situations like this increase participants’ discontent and cause them to believe that employers do not appreciate young people’s efforts, and con-stantly prevent them from completing their transition into the labour market, and from adjusting their needs and life styles accordingly.

Besides the problems connected to various non-transparent practices and favouritism and the disregard for employees’ rights, the participants tend to criticize expertise and business culture of Croatian employers. Some claim that employers usually do not know what they really need. Often they look for an employer who can “do it all” and they seldom encoura-ge expertise and excellence in their own businesses. Several focus grou-ps highlighted the problem of discrimination on the basis of sex, physi-cal disability or life-style (openly commenting earrings on men or visible tattoos) in job interviews. But what perhaps irritates the participants the most is the lack of professional business communication, which they con-sider to be an indicator of elementary business culture:

TYPE 3: Let’s not forget the disregard for business culture. If you send your resume to a company which has a person in charge of receiving resumes, and this person makes 4000-5000 Kuna a month. The least this person could do is say, “Thank you for sending us your resume.” And that’s it. These are the things companies should pay attention to. ‘Cause this makes an impressi-on about the company you’re applying to. About how it treats its employees. Split, unemployed and inactive

Finally, it is interesting to see the perspective of a participant from Karlo-vac who has experience in running a business of his own, taking into con-sideration that the profile of former or current employers was not pre-sent in the focus groups. His opinions indicate that the process of hiring a new employee can be radically different from an employer’s perspective:

62

TYPE 7: It’s a very specific situation and I have to start from the beginning. I was running a glass&plastic vessels production and repair business. Until last year. I was 22 when I started it. This is a business for which there is no scho-ol, no training, no nothing. You have to learn it by doing. And whomever I em-ployed, even a naval engineer, he would know only the theory, and he would be as useful to me as the next person who knew nothing whatsoever about the job. I had to invest time in this person. Whoever it was. So, what was the line between “hired and not hired”? The experience I had with these people. Actu-ally, what mattered to me was who was ready to learn and give all they got. To become the person I needed for the job. Karlovac, employed and students

There is no doubt that most employers would justify their positions and actions by “specific” circumstances. In this sense, the dominant narrati-ve brought forth by our participants about the practices of Croatian em-ployers can be considered indicative. But for a better understanding of the practices of Croatian employers, it is necessary to examine in detail the other side of the coin.

***The participants perceive the economic conditions in the country as extremely unfavourable to young people at the start of their professional life. However, is there a remedy for the situation when the economy does not deliver the desired results? It appears, in this case, that activities of the state take on a more prominent role. The following discourse relates to the work of state institutions which the participants recognize as rele-vant in the youth unemployment debate.

6.5. Institutional practices: a gap between the reality and the needs

Interpretation of the meaning which the participants attribute to the “role of the state” represents one of the biggest challenges of this study. On one hand, the participants intensely debated the ways in which the entire state apparatus influences the problem of youth unemployment. On the other hand, a narrative about one of state institutions – the Cro-atian Employment Service (CES) – dominated over the entire discourse. So we decided to build one narrative around what experts broadly defi-

63

ne as “state intervention”, and another specifically linked to the work of CES. In the latter we will attempt to focus on the general remarks about the work of the institution, whereas more concrete examples will be de-alt with in the chapter on obstacles and support.

6.5.1. The state: support or obstacle?TYPE 7: This has to do, generally speaking, with adopting laws which could encourage production, or protect workers’ rights. Or simplify the hiring proce-dures for employers. Today I’ve read in the papers that it’s no longer going to be possible to pay out worker’s wages without paying all the taxes and benefits, which hasn’t been the case so far. So a colleague of mine asks me what I think about this. Considering the current situation... With the state, employed and un-employed people, employers... I think that at the moment this could lead to new layoffs. Am I right or not? We’ll see. Karlovac, employed and students

Much like this young participant from Karlovac who found employment after a long search, other employed and unemployed participants in focus groups in smaller towns put the topic of state intervention on the agenda of the youth unemployment debate. This group of participants offers a predominantly negative perception of the current labour legi-slation, which is mostly founded on their experiences or those of their peers. Some argue that Croatian laws are merely “empty words” and they express their concern over their violations. Others think the problem lies in the fact that the quality of implementation is lacking, highlighting the role of corrupt state officials. Along with political corruption, the parti-cipants criticize the frequent problem of “doing favours” based on frien-dly or family relations, with the purpose of taking advantage of vario-us opportunities offered by state measures and other interventions. The participants claim that these practices are present even at the lowest ad-ministrative levels. Unlike their peers from small towns, the participants from macro-regional centres referred less to the quality of employment public policies (or the lack thereof), and tended to emphasize cases of “abuse” of active employment policy measures available to employers/young people:

64

TYPE 8: Well I don’t really know. They told me something at the Employment Service. I’ve been registered with the Employment Service for over a year and there are some measures. I don’t know what they’re called. And I don’t even know if it exists any more, but I know there was this one measure. Actually, they called me to apply for a job at the brewery just because of this measu-re. It’s, I don’t know, the state pays your wages for a year. Or something like this. I don’t know.TYPE 1: The state pays 1600 Kuna. TYPE 2: It pays 1600 Kuna, health and social insurance.TYPE 8: Yeah, there used to be this measure.TYPE 2: Then you get fired so they can hire another one for whom they get 1600 Kuna and who will work for them for free. Osijek, unemployed and inactive

This narrative is mainly characterized by dissatisfaction caused by in-competency and the unwillingness of the state to create “general precon-ditions” for solving the problem of youth unemployment. However, most participants focus their attention to the work of a state institution thro-ugh which all institutional practices connected to youth unemployment are most clearly manifested.

6.5.2. Work of the Croatian Employment ServiceQuality of work of the Croatian Employment Service was, expectedly, was one of the hottest topics in the focus groups with unemployed and inactive persons, although it was often tackled in the groups with em-ployed persons and students as well. The work of CES was mainly discu-ssed from a client’s perspective, which is not altogether surprising becau-se most of the participants at some point used its services. The CES narrative was dominated by dissatisfaction of former and cu-rrent clients. Young people expect from CES concrete help and quality information about potential jobs. However, most think that CES merely “gets them through the system”. Instead of obtaining tangible support, they only get drawn further into the world of unemployment, as reco-unted by an employed participant from Slatina who found a job after a long search:

65

TYPE 7: ‘Cause I really think that… That it’s questionable the way some pe-ople search for a job and it’s very important to let them know. People who literally don’t know a thing about job-searching. I think they should be tra-ined. And that’s primarily the job of the Employment Service. Which, in my opinion... I mean, I honestly can’t say... I got, in a year, while there was still a bunch of job vacancies, I got called from the Employment Service just once. They called me once because there was this job opening in Virovitica. So a person comes there. “Good afternoon.” They stamp your unemployment card. “Good-bye.” There’s nothing... I mean... Nobody’s telling you anything. Slatina, employed and students

The aforementioned dimension of “getting people through the system” is often accompanied by the perception that the work of CES is all about “numbers” and not the real needs of its clients:

TYPE 2: I think, really, that their work is best described by the first sentence I heard when I came to a counselling session. And the sentence was “You don’t have to be registered with the Employment Service.”TYPE 3: Yeah. Exactly. Less people registering would make their statistics look better.TYPE 3: That’s the first sentence. I mean, I registered with CES so they could help me find a job. I, as a young person, try to find a job through them, ‘cau-se it’s the thing they do, and the first sentence I hear is “You don’t have to be registered with us.”TYPE 3: Honestly, they don’t care at all. Rijeka, unemployed and inactive

The participants often speak ironically about the services of CES, questio-ning the engagement and the expertise of its employees. A quotation from a long-term unemployed participant from Split best exemplifies this:

TYPE 3: I came to the Employment Service. I’m a food technologist, but I wor-ked as an administrator and cashier. So I wanted to undergo professional tra-ining through CES. I found this course for administrators. And I came to my counsellor. “Good day.” “Good day.” She said, “Hurry up. It’s ten to 11. It’s my break.” And she takes out her lunch. What now? She stamped my card and sent me off. So I went. I came back a second time, and she goes again... And I tell her about the course. “But you don’t have the necessary qualifica-tions, you must have a diploma in administration.” And I tell her, “If I had

66

a diploma in administration, then I wouldn’t be looking into this, would I.” So she puts it on a piece of paper. She had written it down 4 times, to let me know if something comes up. That’s how they get rid of people. Split, unem-ployed and inactive

Consequently, the participants often question the purpose of CES as an institution. However, in doing so, very few of them take into account a wider socio-economic context. A university-educated unemployed par-ticipant from Slatina is one of the few who, contrary to the dominant narrative, considers the current limitations of CES:

TYPE 2: Yeah, but this probably means I should be furious because they can’t find me a job. They can’t find me a job ‘cause there’re no jobs. Evidently, no jobs. For the 10 of us, or how many we are. I mean, my counsellor can’t cre-ate me a job. When there are none. They can offer me, like they did to my fri-end in Zagreb who also graduated in political science, to train for a forklift truck driver. He has obtained an MA so he could operate a forklift. And he can’t even do that without training. ‘Cause he doesn’t know how to operate a forklift. Slatina, unemployed and inactive

The CES narrative reflects mistrust in operational capabilities of the in-stitution, and sometimes in its employees’ motivation and good intenti-ons, which is in stark contrast with findings of some of the recent, mainly quantitative, research (Crnković Pozaić/Meštrović, 2010:6). This image is often substantiated by concrete negative examples of practices, which will be dealt with in more detail in the obstacles chapter. Regardless, this study indicates that the current work of CES in most cases does not succeed in reaching young people as a target group which points to a need for a strategic approach to this issue.

***The participants are mostly dissatisfied with the way state institutions re-act to the problem of youth unemployment. However, along with the ge-neral discontent with the role of the state, another interesting set of topics appeared in the focus groups. It connects in a relatively coherent whole the participants’ opinions about the role of its inevitable alter ego – society.

67

6.6. The state of society: a race to the bottom?

Most of our participants recognized that values, norms, structures and processes taking place in the society they live in have a considerable im-pact on their position at the labour market. Simply put, this discourse examines the way in which the society recognizes youth unemployment as a relevant problem, the solutions it creates, and, perhaps most impor-tantly, how it perceives the reasons why some societal solutions are cho-sen over others. The meta-story of the state of society is divided almost imperceptibly in two main supporting strains. The first one relates to the relationship between older and younger generations, and the other to the general situation in society. Its description is almost inseparable from the discourse about young people as a social group, revealed in Chapter 6.3.

6.6.1. The generation gap: “children of socialism” vs. “children of transition”By examining the complete set of collected data, it becomes apparent that the narrative about the generation gap was not as present as some other narratives, but in several instances it gave an impressive account of mechanisms which, according to the participants’ perspective, impacts the way in which older generation perceive youth, particularly unem-ployed young people.So, for instance, many unemployed participants from bigger towns note that the professional life of young people often gets evaluated from the point of view of an extinct system in which most of their parents had grown up, which they generally refer to as “socialism”. This situation is often seen as a source of considerable pressure, and some, like this unem-ployed participant from Split, observe more subtle consequences of this kind of perception:

TYPE 3: There’s a perception that young people don’t want to work. We all have parents who grew up during socialism, they got married when they were 18-19-20 and had a kid by the time they were 21. They got a job, bought a place of their own. And then they have their 27-year-old son living with them. In a situation like this, in a system like this, none of the newspapers write about why he’s unemployed, only about the number of cars we smashed at a

68

football match, how many of us drink in a park after 11 PM, and this sort of thing. So the entire system is turning against us, ‘cause we’re... ‘Cause they’re in a position to do so. ‘Cause for them it’s just easier. Split, unemployed and inactive

Can the generation gap influence older generations to rationalize to an extent the high youth unemployment and the shifting of blame onto yo-ung people? This study did not come to a conclusive answer to this que-stion, but some of the opinions of our employed participants from smaller towns are highly indicative. Some warn that many “children of sociali-sm” do not understand at all the amount of obstacles which today’s yo-unger generations must face. Perhaps the most illustrative example co-mes from a focus group in Pula:

TYPE 5: Now you have a pretty big problem. The way I see it... My dad says, “Why can’t you solve this housing issue?” And I tell him, “OK. Wait. Let me ask you this. What’s the monthly payment for your home loan?” And then he says, “180 Kuna a month.” And that’s the end of the discussion.(LAUGHTER)TIP 5: 4500 Kuna.TIP 5: My brother, when he was buying, he took half of the amount on loan and the rest he paid in cash. If you want to buy something, you have to save. Still he has to pay 2000 a month. And half of the apartment was paid out in cash. Whereas our father pays 180 Kuna a month. And that’s it. The end of the story. Pula, employed and students

In relation to this, the following question arises: to which extent could the older generations have prepared young people for the challenges they face today. An employed participant from Karlovac who found a job after a long search appears to have an answer to this, and he is not alone:

TYPE 7: I don’t know which category should I put this in, but the general level of interest among young people to find a job stems from the way their parents raised them. Our parents, grand-parents, great grand-parents, people around us, they have a totally different way of thinking about the old system which will never come back. So I think that upbringing of young people... It crea-tes this conflict in their heads. In most cases. ‘Cause they think, “Yeah. The-se are my parents. They told me something really good. And it should work

69

well.” But the system from 25-30 years ago can’t work today. Karlovac, em-ployed and students

The participants obviously think that legacy of the older generations, re-flected in young people’s upbringing, often limits their capacity to under-stand problems of younger generations, as well as to prepare young peo-ple to overcome them. But does this apply to the entire society?

6.6.2. The influence of social climate Social climate is a term intuitively “easy to understand”, but much har-der to define, and an inevitable segment of every definition is “collective-ness” (Adriaanse, 2005: 4-5). For the purposes of this study, social clima-te denotes a collective or, more precisely, aggregate social “mood”. The participants think that the general social climate does not encourage the development of young people, as well as opportunities available to them in Croatia. This narrative was mostly present in groups with employed persons and students. A negative trait of the Croatian society most frequ-ently perceived by our participants is the fact that expertise is not valu-ed and that promotion at work is often linked to favouritism and corrup-tion. A participant from Knin offers such a perspective:

TYPE 6: It’s not only this, but I would like to come back to this claim about experts because it really bothers me. In order to hire people and to keep them in subordination, you have to be a first-class manager (…) hires second-cla-ss employees…FACILITATOR: Sorry, I didn’t understand this…TYPE 6: It’s dangerous to surround yourself with clever people.FACILITATOR: You think that’s the situation in Croatia …TYPE 6: Sure... Knin, employed and students

They point to the lack of collective consciousness needed for initiating substantial socio-political changes, which often leads people to think that it is always “someone else’s fault”. Precisely because of this most parti-cipants see the Croatian society as “conservative and change-resistant”. An interesting point of view comes from an inactive participant from Za-greb, who is planning to leave the country:

70

TYPE 8: Although I said many times that the government should change this and that, the problem is that everybody’s so lethargic around here. You see a situation and automatically say, “OK. This is how it is and I can’t do anyt-hing about it.” I saw it a million times when I was studying. I’d speak to my colleagues, “Ah. See, the situation is like this and that’s it. What can we do?” “But in 20-30 years when we see a generation shift...” I don’t think that ma-kes sense. Nothing’s going to change, not even in 20-30 years, not until we make it change, not until you ask the government to change it. Until you say, “I’ve had enough. You have a responsibility to make it happen. And if you don’t, we’ll have to do something about it.” And not just keep saying; “Ah, see, everywhere’s the same. The entire country is screwed and there’s nothing we can do about it.” Zagreb, unemployed and inactive

Another important characteristic of the social climate in Croatia percei-ved by the participants in groups with employed persons and students is the relationship between “government” and “citizens”. The above quota-tion exemplifies the manner in which the participants think about the ci-tizens’ lack of initiative. However, a reverse mechanism is also recogni-zed. An opinion of an employed participant from Karlovac:

TYPE 7: I’m afraid we’re heading towards this, unless something drasti-cally changes. And I would really want it, for the sake of all young peo-ple... Not only young people, but everyone who wants to take part and chan-ge the society for the better. They should be given an opportunity to do so. I don’t think it’s nice of us to say that the whole responsibility lies with the people in charge of the state. But still, it’s true. And it’s even worse of tho-se in power to say, “You’re all stupid. You’re all lazy. You’re all pathetic.” Karlovac, employed and students

Finally, negative image of the Croatian social climate is completed by the legacy of the 90s war, a topic predominantly recognized by the grou-ps with unemployed and inactive participants, especially in Split. Along with the aforementioned botched process of privatisation which, accor-ding to the participants, caused much damage, many point out that this period caused many problems which the society is still not able to tackle adequately. An example comes from a participant from Split:

TYPE 3: When the war ended, all those boys, 25-30 years old, who were all at their prime, they had them retired. Now they are an additional burden to the state, and they could’ve worked. That’s an important factor too.

71

TYPE 8: Fine, but I think these people are ill. That’s why they’re retired.TYPE 3: But they could’ve had a job, sweeping the streets or something. No, no, no... But what’s really going on?TYPE 8: I’m sure there’re retired people who…TYPE 3: When you’re doing nothing, you keep coming back to how your buddy died in the war. But when you have a job you don’t get to think about it, ‘cause you’re busy thinking about your work. That’s how you, in a way, get rid of your demons. Split, unemployed and inactive

***If you have an impression that the narrative about social climate some-how mirrors the narrative about the mentality of young (unemployed) people (6.3.1.), you may be entirely right. The evident compatibility between the two chapters clearly illustrates the claim of sociologist Zlat-ko Miliša that all social anomalies are best reflected in young people (Mi-liša, 2012). If this is true, we all must ask ourselves about the repercussi-ons of another frequently quoted saying about young people as the “fu-ture of our society”. If we combine the image of the society seen through the eyes of our participants and the descriptions of other basic discour-ses connected to youth unemployment, we come to realize that there is little reason for optimism. But what concrete consequences does youth unemployment bring, according to our participants? This is the topic of the following chapter.

72

Scheme 2: Overview of the basic discourses and their narratives connected to the problem of youth unemployment

73

Mentality of (unemployed) young people

(Ir)relevance of job-searching skills

The influence of the starting point on available opportunities

75

7. CONSEQUENCES OF YOUTH UNEMPLOYMENT: PROBLEMS OF TODAY, AN IMAGE OF TOMORROW?The participants of the focus groups often recognized different consequ-ences of unemployment, and discussions in some groups were filled with memorable accounts and explanations for various consequences. In line with the categories described in following paragraphs, we noticed that the discussion about consequences had two important dimensions. The first dimension discriminates between consequences on the individual and social level. The second dimension is temporal: the participants ten-ded to differentiate between the consequences connected to the current situation or immediate future, and those which will be manifested in a more distant future. These dimensions yielded the typology of social con-sequences in Table 3.According to the typology, consequences of youth unemployment are nu-merous and they are manifested on different levels. On the individual le-vel it is possible to say that the description corresponds to the concept of “existential affliction” presented in a study entitled Unemployed Youth and Social Exclusion in Europe: Learning for Inclusion (Warner/Wildemeer-ch/Jansen, 2005: xi). In the short-term it is manifested through various types of psycho-physical problems, and in the long-term it has negative impacts on life chances of a young person. On the other side, our partici-pants think that youth unemployment contributes to a society “racing to the bottom”. In the short-term it is manifested in the boiling social dis-content, which can become public unless concrete opportunities for posi-tive social change become available. In the long-term, it is manifested in the loss of the overall social potential.

76

Table 3: Typology of consequences of youth unemployment

LEVEL/TEMPORAL DIMENSION

SHORT-TERM LONG-TERM

Individual level Psycho-physical problems

Negative percepti-on of life chances

Social level Spread of social discontent

Loss of social potential

In the following paragraphs you will see descriptions of all types of con-sequences, starting from the problems on the individual level and them moving on to the social problems.

7.1. Psycho-physical problems

TYPE 3: This is really... When you’re unemployed, especially if you’re out of work for several years, it really affects the way you think. You start thinking you’re incompetent and you start wondering if you’re sane at all. ‘Cause... You don’t really know. You lose your identity. You’re confused. You don’t know what to do. You start doubting your abilities. Zagreb, unemployed and inactive

The perspective of our long-term unemployed participant from Zagreb was very much present in the groups with unemployed and inactive persons, es-pecially in bigger towns. The participants listed a number of psycho-physical problems which they experienced in the period of unemployment. The des-cription of this type of problems is dominated by a narrative about the lack of perspective and frustration over endless rejections by employers, which often ends in resignation and giving up after a prolonged period of unemployment. Depression, discontent and deteriorating health are some of the most common “symptoms” of unemployment. The participants relate psychological problems to constant fear for their (future) existence and to “social exclusion9” which

9 The term social exclusion is put between quotation marks because we cannot be completely certain whether the participants of the focus groups used it consistently, especially since it has become a buzz word in the context of unemployment. On the other hand, it is questionable whether there is a “correct” definition of social exclusion. As the UNDP Report on social exclusion from 2006 puts it, “Although there is not a single commonly accepted definition of social exclusion, it can be described as a multi-dimensional phenomenon which weakens the relationship between an individual and community. The weakening of this relationship may have economic, political, socio-cultural and special repercussions”. (Bayley/Gorančić-Lazetić, 2006: 21)

77

they tend to feel after a period of unemployment. It is interesting to note that even the participants who experienced only short-term unemployment, often warn about its devastating effects, especially on a person’s self-confidence. This can be seen in an example provided by a participant from Zagreb who fo-und employment shortly after graduation:

TYPE 6: While I was going through a period in which, not that I didn’t have any work, but I had very little work, and consequently very little money, it was so hard for me to tell if I was a lousy employee or... Is it that nobody wanted to hire me, or the situation is really bad and there’re no jobs. So, this is something which really… Something I couldn’t really share with anybody. I mean, I could’ve shared it but no kind of feedback would appease me. No one would say, “Yes. This is your fault. You have to do this and that. And it’s going to be better.” or “No, it’s not your fault. The crisis has gone ram-pant.” I mean, my experience tells me that people are on their own with this. Zagreb, employed and students

Particularly illustrative was the perspective of the participants who expe-rienced prolonged periods of unemployment and then managed to find employment. Thinking back, a participant from Slatina tells her story through a set of “advice” to young people who find themselves in a si-milar position:

TYPE 7: I never wanted to give up, emotionally or otherwise. So I managed somehow. It’s not... It’s not that I had to. I had financial support from my pa-rents. And I still do. It’s not about that, it’s just... I simply said to myself, “OK. I’m not just going to lie around. I’m going to invest something in myself.” So I went and got a teaching degree. And then, I don’t know, I’m going to learn something. Foreign languages, whatever. I’m going to work on myself. I didn’t want to give up and I kept sending my resumes. And I always worked somet-hing on the side.I gave language lessons to kids and... I don’t know. I baked cookies. I gave dance lessons. I didn’t want to surrender and just mope around the house, “Oh my. Now let’s all cry ‘cause I don’t have a job”. OK. I don’t have a job and neither do a million people. I think that’s the most important. For a person not to give up and not to give in. Slatina, employed and students

78

So a number of participants offer and alternative view of this situation. They think it is important not to “give up and give in”, as our participant from Slatina would say. More importantly, some of them claim, drawing from their experience, that this is the “right way” which may subsequ-ently lead to employment. Nevertheless, it is interesting to hear what the participants have to say about consequences of long-term unemployment on a young person’s life. This leads us to another type of consequences, described in the following paragraphs.

7.2. Negative perception of life chances

TYPE 3: That’s what I’m afraid of, that I’ll be stuck here. That I’ll be 50, le-arning new computer stuff, new technologies. That I won’t understand a thing and that I’ll just complain all the time. That a time will come when I’m re-ally going to regret the life I had. It’s not just about work, just to be clear, or about the money. Ever since I could, I was independent. I had a source of in-come. I never needed much ‘cause I’m frugal and I manage to get by with what I have. But when you literally have to beg for 10 Kuna for a coffee from your old man... That’s hell when you’re 29. So I’m afraid it’s always going to be like that and that I’ll have a lousy pension and live in an awful apartment. And cook and... Man, I can’t anymore. Zagreb, unemployed and inactive

The fear for (or perhaps of) the future expressed by our long-term unem-ployed participant from Zagreb is shared by many unemployed and inac-tive participants. Although memorable mainly because of their emotional charge, the descriptions of the consequences of prolonged unemployment on life chances expressed in the groups with unemployed and inactive persons do not differ dramatically from the ones expounded in the grou-ps with employed persons and students.The notion of life chances was first introduced in the social sciences by German sociologist Max Weber, and it refers to opportunities available to a person to improve the quality of his or her life. In this sense, the con-cept is directly linked to the notions of stratification and (vertical) soci-al mobility. This is a probabilistic concept – it denotes a degree of proba-bility that a person’s life, taking into consideration specific factors, takes on a certain direction (Hughes/Sharrock/Martin, 2003). However, some new authors consider Weber’s definition of life chances which is strongly

79

focused on socio-economic status, to be too reductionist, pointing to the need to introduce other variables, such as sex, age and race, demonstra-ting the connection between them and a person’s choice of a life style, and insisting on taking into consideration particularities of different soci-al groups (Kernion, 2005: 11; Roche, 2006: 9). The analysis of this narra-tive will try to demonstrate how participants perceive the effects of pro-longed unemployment at a young age on opportunities available to a per-son to improve the quality of his or her life10. This study unequivocally demonstrates that even short-term unemployment creates in our partici-pants a pessimistic perception of life chances.The participants also expressed fear connected to their future existence. The unemployed participants from smaller towns say that many young people who experience a delayed entry in the labour market will be for-ced to work much longer in life and can expect small pensions and a very uncertain old age. They point to the perspective of “40-year-olds without a day of recorded work experience” and they warn about the reluctance of employers to hire them. The fear of this kind of scenario causes many young people to “lower their criteria”. Namely, young people are “for-ced” to take on substandard jobs, because, after a while, there is simply no other option. An employed participant from Zagreb reveals how the mechanism functions:

TYPE 6: So besides the psychological and existential problems, I think that, after all this disappointment and because they have no money, young people are forced to look for jobs which are... How should I put it? Considerably be-low their qualifications. This, I think, results in the fact that they no longer follow trends in their profession, they don’t continue education, and after a while they simply become incompetent. Because the market moved on in re-lation to what they used to be before they accepted employment below their competences. Zagreb, employed and students

Unlike the young people who are about to enter the labour market, the unemployed participants tend to highlight another pitfall of (sudden) unemployment, which relates to the inability to meet previously under-taken financial obligations. A participant from Knin describes this with an example of the “loan trap”:

10 In line with our discussion, “quality of life” in this narrative is not defined by concrete indicators, but is framed by the perception of our participants. Their perception of a “good life” surely deserves a whole new study. However, we believe that the quotations and comments presented here may at least offer guidelines for a future study.

80

TYPE 3: Take, for instance, my example from 2008. Back then I was wor-king in Varaždin where I had a permanent job. Then my family got into some financial trouble. I had a job and they needed help. So I took a loan, I was ba-rely 19 years old. I took a loan. That’s when I got into trouble, get it? I had a permanent job and I figured, “I have a job. I should fix this. I have to. I have to help my parents, right?” And what happened? I was working for a year. And then, “Who’s the youngest in the firm? Who came in last is the first to go.” And what do I get now? What do I get?TYPE 8: The loan.TYPE 3: The loan, the bills. That’s my problem now. I have no job, have no income, but the bank keeps sending the bills every month. The bank doesn’t care whether you’re able to pay or not. Knin, unemployed and inactive

In a series of fears expressed in the focus groups, we single out the one best described by the notion of a “useless life” which boils down to “go-ing out for a coffee” and “bad routines” which lead to lethargy. It is also described by the concept of a “prolonged youth” which is usually connec-ted to the inability to become independent from one’s parents and to fo-und one’s own family. It appears that all participants, more or less, share the aforementioned fears. They generally think that unemployment prevents young peo-ple from living the way they want to and to fulfil their potential to the fullest. For many unemployed participants this is already a concrete per-spective, while the employed participants and students are well aware of its latent threat.

7.3. The spread of social discontent

Mainly in the groups with employed persons and students organized in smaller towns, the participants tend to see the current situation as a ca-talyst for negative short-term social processes focusing on young peo-ple. The core of their discontent lies in the previously described elements of the social climate permeated by favouritism and corruption. This is emphasized by a participant from Karlovac:

81

TYPE 7: Yeah. The perception that you can get a job only through family and other connections or if you own the right political party membership card is additionally discouraging. I think this perception is still pretty strong, especi-ally in some families. Karlovac, employed and students

Some participants, like this student from Pula, claim that this “mood” can easily spread from one group to another:

TYPE 5: If you look at it in economic terms. Or however. When things get bad in a country, that’s when the biggest football riots start to happen. There were none before or after. It’s simple, if you have a dissatisfied group, their discon-tent easily spreads elsewhere. There has to be some sort of impact on the soci-ety, all in all. Pula, employed and students

Finally, the range of participants’ opinions about this type of consequen-ces is rounded up by a negative vision of a society where social discon-tent linked to youth unemployment may escalate in an open rebellion, not unlike the way described by an employed participant from Zagreb:

TYPE 7: If this goes on, it could cause a rebellion among young people. Young people might organize themselves and organize a riot against the government. People on the streets. Then strikes. Massive strikes. Like in Greece. Take Gree-ce, for example. Burning down government buildings. God forbid, but this si-tuation is obviously going to happen. Zagreb, employed and students

Although this opinion is more an exception that a rule, it is obvious that the participants recognize that in the short-term youth unemployment contributes to the spread of social discontent and the negative “social mood”. What can we hope for in the long-term?

7.4. The loss of social potential

TYPE 2: Unfortunately, it’s become common for an economist to work as a waiter, and for a lawyer to work as a shop attendant. This has become nor-mal nowadays, but I don’t want to be stuck in a shop. That’s it. I don’t think that’s the best I can do. Split, unemployed and inactive

82

The perspective of this university-educated unemployed participant from Split expresses the first out of four dominant social deviations recognized by the participants as consequences of long-term unemployment. They consider that in these conditions working outside one’s profession has become a “norm” and they wonder what kind of society does not en-courage young people to reach their full potential. To most of them the answer is clear: the kind of society which is ready to give up on its own long-term development potential.This type of consequences dominated the discussions in the groups with employed persons and students, regardless of the town size. Besides the acceptance of unemployment as “normal”, another important element of this type of consequences recognized by the participants is the creation of “social parasites”: a generation accustomed to living off the state help. A typical description of this “group” comes again from Split, from a gro-up with employed persons and students:

TYPE 7: Ha. We’re seeing a great number of parasites.FACILITATOR: Yes? What do you mean by parasites? Explain it to me.TYPE 7: Well... A guy, let’s say, can’t find work for years, and then he just stops looking. He’s in a rut and his only real job is to get from the state as much money as possible. He’ll report to the Employment Service, the Cen-tre for Social Care. He can get financial help for heating in the sum of 1200 Kuna. And then he can receive support from the city borough. In the sum of 800 Kuna, depending on the borough. He gets 500 Kuna of social be-nefits each month. He’ll also have two kids and then child support checks will start coming in every month. And so he keeps on living off the state. Split, employed and students

The appearance of “social parasites” is often accompanied by an increa-se in illegal activities and the rise of the black market. While some resign to live off the state, other more “ambitious” individuals choose to raise the quality of their life by resorting to all available mechanisms, which need not be legal. Finally, another dimension of this problem perceived by the participants can be described as the creation of the “incompe-tent class” which rests on a huge number of unemployed young people who are supposed to be making their mark in the labour market instead. This type of consequence is vividly described by an employed participant from Pula who used to be long-term unemployed:

83

TYPE 7: And what will happen... I mean, these young people will grow ol-der. And they’re still not going to have any work experience, something they should’ve acquired when they were young. So we’ll have a mass of incompe-tent people later on. ‘Cause these young people will grow older. Pula, em-ployed and students

Who will transfer professional skills and knowledge to future generati-ons? How will today’s young people secure the sustainability of the reti-rement and healthcare systems? What can motivate competent and edu-cated young people to stay in Croatia? These and similar questions stem from the descriptions of unemployment consequences which we termed as the loss of social potential.

We conclude this section by a perspective of an unemployed participant from Karlovac who compares the situation in Croatia and abroad and warns that Croatia has already become a county of immigrant cheap labour:

TYPE 3: I wanted to say that this is already happening here. This what the colleague said, that it’s going to happen. It’s already here, the cheap labour taking more and more jobs. They come from everywhere. Just look at Karlo-vac. Don’t get me wrong. I don’t have anything against anyone. But in Kar-lovac, we have, and I’m almost sure of it, more than 5000 people from Bo-snia and Herzegovina, who came to work here for minimum wages. Two tho-usand Kuna or something. And I can understand why. ‘Cause back home they had no work at all. And here at least they have some work. They’ll take any job. And maybe it’s because they’re ready to do anything. They work all day long, from morning till night, at construction sites. Or god knows where. For two thousand Kuna. I think that’s one of the reasons for the current situation, ‘cause wages are low and it’s easy to abuse workers. ‘Cause... they know. If you don’t want to work, there’ll be another fool ready to do anything for this kind of money. Karlovac, unemployed and inactive

***The analysis of basic discourses and the consequences linked to the pro-blem of youth unemployment points to the severity of the situation, as felt by our participants. Therefore, it makes sense to examine what kind of barriers/obstacles they tend to come across on the labour market. This is precisely the question we will try to answer in the following chapter.

85

8. OBSTACLES TO YOUTH EMPLOYMENTThis part of study will highlight concrete barriers which our participants recognize as challenges to youth employment in the Croatian context. Therefore, it differs from the descriptions of the basic discourses and the-ir narratives expounded in Chapter 6. When speaking about obstacles, our participants assumed different roles. It is precisely the distinction of the roles which allowed for a detailed classification in this category. So our participants examined obstacles to youth employment from the per-spective of a:

1. beneficiary of active employment policy measures,2. job-seeker,3. potential entrepreneur.

Therefore, descriptions of the categories will reflect the above roles.

8.1. Obstacles to using active employment policy measures

It is reassuring that most participants are aware of the opportunities offe-red by active employment policy measures, although some individuals question the purpose of the entire system, which they mainly link to CES, as we have seen in the basic discourses chapter. Also, many have benefi-ted from different active employment policy measures, even the partici-pants in the groups with employed persons and students. This makes the-ir perspective very valuable.This type of obstacles was mainly perceived by the participants from bigger towns in both types of groups. Zagreb is an interesting excepti-on, where neither of the groups expressed this type of personal experien-ce, although the work of CES became a relevant topic, particularly in the group with unemployed and inactive persons.

86

It should be noted that the participants faced obstacles in using three types of measures: on-the-job training without employment, different types of vocational and occupational training offered by CES and incen-tives for hiring long-term unemployed people. We invite you to read ca-refully the following quotations because some will show that, even if our participants benefited from a measure, they often do not know its correct title nor they are familiar with its basic elements (who can use it, under which conditions, its duration, etc.). Problems with on-the-job training without employment can be divided into two main groups. One is connected to the inability to use the mea-sure in cases when a potential beneficiary has any kind of officially re-corded work experience, as explained by this university-educated unem-ployed participant from Rijeka:

TYPE 2: This measure targeting people younger than 29 allows me to come to a law firm and they get an incentive form the state. But there’s a catch, ‘cause I can’t have worked anywhere else. If I have any kind of recorded work expe-rience then I lose the right to benefit from this measure. So now I’m unem-ployed for four months, ‘cause it has to be a law firm. If I work somewhere else, I will lose the right to this measure, and no law firm is going to hire me. Rijeka, unemployed and inactive

So any kind of officially recorded work experience, either in one’s profe-ssion or not, often presents an obstacle to benefiting from this measure. On the other hand, the participants recognized more than once that the problem also lies in the fact that the use of this measure is conditioned by taking a “professional examination”, thus limiting it to a relatively small number of professions. A university-educated unemployed partici-pant from Knin does not hide her frustration:

TYPE 2: Yeah, but take me for example, I’m an accountant. They wouldn’t let me work there. I wanted to try at the polytechnic at the accountancy. I couldn’t do it ‘cause you need to take the professional exam and the polytechnic doesn’t require it. They should let us take the exam wherever we can, and not to open 2-3 slots a year. If there’s a possibility to take on more candidates... This way we’re all hindered on the local level. Knin, unemployed and inactive

87

Encouraging is the fact that the recently adopted Employment Incentive Act makes provisions to solve both these problems. It remains to be seen whether the obstacles will be eliminated in reality by the introduction (and implementation) of the new legal framework.When speaking about problems related to employment training, the par-ticipants usually say that it is does not correspond to the needs of yo-ung people. An almost perfect description of this mechanism can be seen in the following exchange of our unemployed and inactive participants from Split:

TYPE 3: I met this girl. She also attended a course in graphic design through the Employment Service. For two months. But she wasn’t interested at all. My logical question was, “So why are you doing this?” “Well, I don’t know, they told me at CES to finish the course, that it’s good for me.”TYPE 8: And they give you, I don’t know, 1500 Kuna a month?TYPE 1: It’s employment training?TYPE 8: Yeah. TYPE 3: So she did it because of the money and because they talked her into it. And it’s like you say, maybe she took someone’s place, but on the other hand, nothing’s changed. She doesn’t have a job.FACILITATOR: Thank you, Marko and Ivana. Tamara, you said you did so-mething similar, if I heard you right?TYPE 1: Yeah, yeah. It was last year. It ended in October.FACILITATOR: Tell me, what was the training about?TYPE 1: It’s nothing special, for a waitress. I told them... Honestly, I needed some… I had no income, so I told them, “You can put me in a course for flori-sts for all I care. Just give me the monthly allowance and I don’t give a damn.” Split, unemployed and inactive

The participants see the inefficiency of employment training as a result of the combination of the indifference of the CES staff, limited choice of training courses and the (un)availability of financial support for their beneficiaries.Finally, the participants recognized obstacles to using direct incentives which are available to employees who hire unemployed persons from different categories. A participant from Split who experienced long-term unemployment speaks about her unpleasant experience:

88

TYPE 7: Regarding the incentives. When I was looking for a job through CES, they called me to tell me they found me a job. A business of some kind, just starting… Everything seemed just great. To cut the long story short, the em-ployer ended up making threats to me. I had to call... I didn’t call the police but I said I would so he stopped. So even with CES you have to double-check. The people at CES... I don’t know if anything’s changed in the last 5 years. I don’t know if they check who they give the incentives to. This way, I think, this guy got, in my name, 30000 Kuna. He just wanted, through a firm that doesn’t really exist, to get my incentives. Split, employed and students

It is disconcerting that here too the participants evaluate negatively the capacities of CES to answer their needs. In this case it is the (in)ability to control employers who benefit from their measures. These experien-ces (or doubts?) are especially troubling in the context of broadening the scope of several active employment policy measures based on the provisions of the recently adopted Employment Incentive Act. The effi-ciency of its implementation will largely depend on the competence of the CES employees.

8.2. Young people not perceived as potential employees

When they take on the role of job-seekers, the participants see the biggest obstacle in the insistence of employers on previous work experience. This problem is recognized predominantly in bigger towns where the partici-pants warn about an “employer’s rhetoric” about the importance of work experience and expertise in the recruitment process. An unemployed par-ticipant from Osijek offers an interesting perspective and point to the ri-gidity of the definition of work experience embraced by numerous Cro-atian employers:

TYPE 1: I mean, if you don’t have experience, it doesn’t mean that you don’t know anything. You don’t have experience ‘cause the official record is empty. But you can do stuff. ‘Cause I can do massages, I can do facials, but the thing is no one’s going to give me a chance to prove myself. My employment record is empty, but I know stuff. Osijek, unemployed and inactive

89

Besides formal education, the participants most frequently cite different types of temporary and student jobs and volunteering as sources of the-ir expertise. Most of them, especially unemployed participants, often feel frustrated in situations when, for what they perceive to be reasons of pure formality, they automatically get “eliminated from the race” for jobs they could well perform, according to their accounts.The participants warn that some employers even go a step further. Com-peting for entry-level and poorly paid positions often requires (formal) work experience. Perhaps accounts like this can offer a hint why many young people, like this participant from Knin, give up on job-searching and become inactive:

TYPE 8: I applied for a job as a waiter. I have no work experience. The Em-ployment Service said it wasn’t necessary. It really did. I came there and so did the guys. From Zagreb. They own a coffee shop chain at petrol stations. Or something like that. So they ask me, “Do you have work experience?” and I say, “I don’t. Your ad said it wasn’t necessary.” “Oh but it is necessary. It’s a waiter’s job. We’re not there often and the work has to be supervised.” Knin, unemployed and inactive

It is interesting to hear the perspective of university-educated partici-pants who, after useless job-searching, start looking for employment outside one’s profession, usually competing with candidates with lower qualifications. With a great deal of cynicism they note that, in situations like this, the long years invested in education and getting a formal quali-fication often become a burden which is not easy to get rid of:

TYPE 2: I know how this works ‘cause my friend applied for the same job, and she also has higher education, like I do. And so what happens? They nor-mally hire someone with a high-school diploma. We’re over-qualified. We, university-educated, we’re usually over-qualified. I also applied for all sorts of jobs: salesperson in a tobacco shop in a shopping mall, salesperson in Techno-market. The answer was always the same, and CES had nothing to do with it. They didn’t notify me about these vacancies. I look for a job all the time. At the end, and I know it sounds ironic, it’s the university diploma that becomes an obstacle. Rijeka, unemployed and inactive

90

Situations like this put young people in a sort of limbo. They are aware that jobs are scarce and employers “have all the power” and they are in a position to set unfounded and often unrealistic conditions. This is when the previously described weaknesses of Croatian employers, seen throu-gh the eyes of our young participants, become prominent, especially the fact that many “do not know what really they want”. Surely there is more than one “truth” about the current situation, but it is obvious that there is plenty of responsibility to go around.

8.3. Obstacles to youth entrepreneurship

On many occasions participants said they thought about starting their own business, especially in the groups with employed persons and stu-dents and mostly in bigger towns. However, for all of them initiating their own entrepreneurial venture remains only a thought. Therefore, it seems logical that most unemployed and inactive participants do not even consider it an option. The question is why.Dominant obstacles appear to be of a financial nature. The participants point out that starting a business in Croatia is extremely costly and al-most impossible without an adequate financial backing. A student from Knin illustrates this by comparing examples from Croatia and Canada:

TYPE 5: A huge problem in Croatia is that, if you want to open up a busine-ss, you must have at least twenty thousand Kuna, depending if it’s plc or Ltd. And it takes months to get it registered with the Commercial Court. In Cana-da you fill out an online form and for a hundred dollars you get all the pa-perwork done. The problem in Croatia is that people don’t want to... it takes way too long to open up a business so people lose their motivation and so on... Knin, employed and students

Besides the financial obstacles to starting a business, the participants po-int out that the development of an entrepreneurial idea begins even be-fore the formal registration of a firm. They claim that young people find it difficult to obtain information they need when starting a business. An employed participant from Osijek offers his view:

91

TYPE 6: Yeah, the problem is when young people have ideas and they want to be entrepreneurs they don’t know where to find the information they need. How to open up a firm, how to get incentives, where to find the money? I hear a bunch of young people here who go about it the wrong way. They want to open up… They invest their money without checking all the opportunities ava-ilable to them, what the state or the EU have to offer. I think there should be an institution where young people could get information precisely about this kind of thing. Apparently, the Employment Service has got nothing, you can only get very basic information, ‘cause the staff are busy, in a hurry, and so on. At the Chamber of Commerce no one answers the phone. It’s the same with the Chamber of Trades and Crafts. So again the problem remains where to find the information. Osijek, unemployed and students

They are aware that it is after the registration of a business that real challenges await. They point to the lack of adequate support mechani-sms for “fresh” business initiatives. It is interesting that none of the parti-cipants in 16 focus groups mentioned the term “business incubator“, and the term “cluster” got mentioned only ones. It was recognized in a des-cription of a support mechanism, and not as an independent idea expre-ssed by the participants without the help of a facilitator.

Whether we agree or not with the participants’ perception of obstacles, it is hard not to be surprised by their unwillingness to start a business venture. Although it is not hard to agree that Croatia is by no means an entrepreneurial paradise, it is important to note that some participants recognized another, already mentioned and almost invisible, barrier – the mentality influenced by the dominant social climate. A student from Split gives a clear account of this:

TYPE 5: We’re not raised to be entrepreneurs. Our nation is…FACILITATOR: What do you mean when you say we’re not raised to be entrepreneurs?TYPE 5: Well, firstly, we’re not raised to be... To take risks and be brave. It’s probably ‘cause our parents used to work in the old system and we come from this kind of environment, where they had... I mean, 90% of us live in apar-tments our parents got in the old system. They don’t have the capitalist spirit. That’s why today they struggle at the labour market. And they didn’t raise us that way. I don’t know what I can offer, I mean what I can do as an entrepreneur. Split, employed and students

92

***The description of obstacles which young people face at the labour mar-ket is based on the experiences of our participants. The problems they identified as crucial for the problem of youth unemployment in Croatia (described in Chapter 6) are reflected in their descriptions of obstacles. They highlighted the influence of the general state of economy and the crisis on the opportunities available to young people, as well as the idea of the dominant mentality which participants often link to the notions of the lack of initiative, conservatism, corruption and aversion to risk-ta-king. It appears that participants tend to recognize general trends more easily than concrete problems, which is manifested by different lengths of Chapters 6 and 8. This is an important observation for all stakeholders who are interested in including young people in decision-making proce-sses: the fact they have not personally experienced a phenomenon or a process, usually does not prevent young people from having an “opini-on” about it. Understanding these opinions is crucial for creating soluti-ons which young people can understand and accept.This topic deserves perhaps a whole new study, so it is necessary to bring the focus back to the unemployment issue. After having heard general opinions of our participants about youth unemployment, examined its consequences and the things which prevent young people from avoiding their devastating effects, it is time to deal with another important questi-on: who (or what) can young unemployed people rely on?

94

9. SUPPORT TO UNEMPLOYED YOUNG PEOPLEWhile categorising the participants’ contributions related to the support which is (or could be) available to unemployed young people, we enco-untered a specific dilemma: what are the criteria for categorisation? Lo-gical criteria seemed to be the type of support (financial, psycho-emotio-nal...) and the type of provider (family, peer groups, state institutions…). However, repeated examination of the material revealed that partici-pants tend to follow certain patterns in their descriptions of support offe-red by various providers. More specifically, they evaluate different types of support in relation to the degree to which they meet their expectati-ons. The application of this criterion yielded three types of support which are described in the following paragraphs.

9.1. Ambivalent support

The term “ambivalent” implies a type of contradiction. It is precisely this type of assessment which was detected from the participants’ contribu-tions when speaking about the support they got from their peers and fa-mily in periods of unemployment.The ambivalent nature of the support was recognized mainly by the par-ticipants from bigger towns. In relation to their families, many said that their family members provided strong support, financially and emotio-nally, in the period of unemployment. A university-educated participant from Knin perceives her family’s support in such manner:

FACILITATOR: Do family and friends help?TYPE 2: Sure they do. They support me in everything. In job-searching, inter-views. They support me in all of this. If it wasn’t for them, there wouldn’t be anyone else. Knin, unemployed and inactive

However, many participants warn that parental support rarely comes for “free”. A university-educated unemployed participant from Zagreb offers a vivid description of the aforementioned generation gap which often

95

prevents parents from understanding the position of unemployed young people, and often transforms good intentions into an additional burden:

FACILITATOR: This is interesting. She mentioned the pressure. Does anyone else have similar experiences or opinions about this? TYPE 2: Well, sure. Of course. Coming from those who worked during socia-lism, like parents and others. It was much simpler back then ‘cause once you found a job it was forever. And then they start asking, “When will you find a job? How? Why?” It’s so hard for them to see that the situation from 30-40 years ago is not the same today. Zagreb, unemployed and inactive

Besides unintentionally creating additional pressure which may contri-bute to the consequences of unemployment described earlier, some par-ticipants think that parental support sometimes can have a completely opposite effect from what it was initially meant to be – tolerating the “drone”. The position which was expressed more often by the employed participants and students is neatly summed up in this short exchange between two participants from Knin:

TYPE 5: Where do these people get the money from?TYPE 7: So who can give them the money? Their mom and dad can give them the money. I sure as hell won’t give you money for going out for a coffee. Aga-in, it’s the family that supports these drones. Knin, employed and students

Overall, our participants think that family support, although mostly welcome, sometimes may have unexpected or unwanted consequences, and most recognize that they often come “in a package”. This situation appears similar to peer support, with some minor differences. Namely, the participants’ opinions about this type of support are more clearly di-vided: its effects are perceived either positively or negatively. It is also interesting to note that this topic was more present in focus groups orga-nized in small towns.One line of argumentation, where peer groups are seen as a source of useful information for job-seekers, as well as of strong emotional and psychological support, is presented by participants from Knin:

96

FACILITATOR: Does it make you feel lonely or isolated?TYPE 8: It doesn’t, me personally. ‘Cause I have at least 5 people who will let me know if they hear about a job opening, or anything like that. A colleague form university will call me from Zagreb. He’ll say, “Look, there’s a job ope-ning in Požega.” I mean, I feel totally OK.FACILITATOR: So, your friends support you. What about others?TYPE 8: Absolutely.TYPE 3: Absolutely. My buddies. ‘Cause if you have no one to talk to, who you’re going to tell your problems? What then? You just shut yourself and that’s it. TYPE 3: You can have all sorts of friends, but if you don’t have the friends who’ll listen to you, it’s like you have none. Knin, unemployed and inactive

On the other hand, unemployed and inactive participants from small towns also note that peer support sometimes simply is not there. They warn about patterns which cause segregation of young people on the basis of their employment status. This often leads to a situation where unemployed young people merely feed each other’s sense of frustration and the “nothing can be done” feeling. Participants from Slatina show how this barrier can be manifested:

TYPE 8: Yeah. All my friends are also unemployed.(LAUGHTER)TYPE 2: Well, that’s the kind of people we hang out with. Yeah.TYPE 8: Those who have a job won’t have nothing to do with us ‘cause otherwise they would have to keep paying for our drinks. Slatina, unem-ployed and inactive

Family and peer support only partially fulfils our participants’ expectati-ons. However, there are actors whose support gets rated in a rather con-sistent manner.

97

9.2. Inadequate support

The participants, predominantly from the groups with unemployed and inactive young people, think that the support from CES is unsatisfactory. We have dealt already with the shortcomings in the work of CES which are strongly reflected in the evaluation of the support it provides. The participants point to the lack of interest and motivation of some CES em-ployees and to their practices of irregular communication with clients. Some participants go as far as to say that CES is by no means immune to corruption. When speaking about opportunities offered by CES services, the participants claim that “they always take care of their own”. They are displeased with the quality of services (measures) which are on offer, emphasizing that they are seldom adapted to their needs. It is important to mention that most participants, not unlike this one from Karlovac, are aware of the limited capacities of CES, but they are not satisfied with the lack of basic support to their job-searching efforts:

TYPE 3: Look, I don’t have big expectations from my counsellor. I just want her to forward me an e-mail, if she thinks something could be of interest to me. Although I can look for it myself. I know that there are probably a thousand of us on her list and that it’s hard with all of us. But then again, she could try and do a bit more. Karlovac, unemployed and inactive

It appears that a part of the problem stems from a gap between what yo-ung people expect and what CES, within the existing framework, must (and can) do. An often repeated mantra that “they should look for a job themselves” prompts our participants from Pula to question the very pur-pose of the existence of CES:

FACILITATOR: But do you think that it’s up to CES to find you a job. Or is it you who have to find a job for yourself? What do you think about this? TYPE 1: We have to look for a job ourselves. No one can do that for us.TYPE 4: Yeah, we have to do this. But they should help us, at least to some extent.TYPE 3: ‘Cause, otherwise, what are they there for?TYPE 4: To help me, as a person. To find a job more easily. To find a job. Or to get contacts. Pula, unemployed and inactive

98

There should be no doubt that the perspective of the CES employees would be, perhaps even radically, different from the perspective of our unemployed participants. However, evaluations like this should defini-tely alarm responsible people in this institution. Based on a substantial number of complaints made by our participants, who are current or for-mer clients of CES, it is safe to say that they rarely perceive CES as a re-levant source of support. While taking into account all the limitations which stand in its way, CES and other relevant stakeholders should con-sider these findings seriously.

9.3. Empowering support

Activities and programmes of civil society organizations, most of all vo-lunteering, are recognized as a source of empowerment, especially by the participants from bigger towns. Some of them, like this unemployed disa-bled participant from Zagreb, point out that such activities often have a very positive effect on their social life, and help them to smartly fill the-ir time, because time tends to “pass slowly” when you are unemployed:

FACILITATOR: Is there anything else which might help you with this? Somet-hing which might give you support and encouragement? TYPE 4: Well, any kind of activism is great support. You get to meet lots of other people who are more or less the same age as you are. You can always talk about something and that’s what gives you hope. ‘Cause when you’re unem-ployed for a long time, your days keep getting longer and longer, and you don’t feel useful, like you did something that day. So when you do something, even if it’s only for an hour, it gets better. Zagreb, unemployed and inactive

They also note that volunteering allows them to acquire valuable skills which might help them find a job and restore their shaken self-confiden-ce, through the realization of projects which they consider “their own”. An important component, particularly when it comes from a participant who found employment after a long search, is the fact that some em-ployers do indeed recognize and value volunteering experiences of the-ir potential employers:

99

TYPE 7: After, I don’t know, a year and a half, this woman calls me, “Do you have a job?”I say I volunteer. “Listen, we need someone for… Are you intere-sted?” And I say I am. I mean they can’t give me any guarantees, but at least I have a secure job for a year and a half, until she comes back. That’s how I got here. My volunteering saved me ‘cause I didn’t have any other experience. Split, employed and students

***Relating to the final paragraphs in the previous section, do we dare quo-te Galileo and say “Eppur si muove!”11? Do young people in Croatia re-ally think that civil society organizations and volunteering programmes are useful ways to spend some quality free time and to acquire compe-tences which might help them get out of the unemployment line? Is this the message of the previously described categorisation? The answer is, in the spirit of ambivalence, yes and no.Yes, because we tried to present accurately the way our participants per-ceive different types of support in the period of unemployment. And no, because in this particular case we must not ignore the fact that most participants were recruited by civil society organizations active in the communities where the focus groups took place. Although there were clear limitations which prevented our partner organizations from recrui-ting participants from the ranks of their members or the members of the-ir partner organizations (see Annex 2), it is not possible to rule out a po-ssibility that the sample might have been biased to a certain extent. If the “snow ball” started off from the circle of people coming from our partner organizations, it is possible to speculate that it first “stopped” at persons who are, if not close to, then certainly familiar with the organizations. We must not dismiss the fact that the focus groups took place on the pre-mises of our partner organizations and we should also keep in mind that there is no such thing as a “neutral place” for them to take place in (Blo-or et al., 2001: 39). In conclusion, we would like to make clear that these remarks do not make our findings flawed, but merely point to the need to examine them while taking into consideration their specific context. This should be considered in other research as well, particularly in cases which employ qualitative methodology.

11 Translated from Italian: “And yet it moves!”

101

10. PARTICIPANTS TAKE CHARGE – RECOMMENDATIONS AND IDEAS DEVELOPED DURING THE PROCESSThe analysis of the complete set of data yielded 49 recommendati-ons which relate to different aspects of unemployment, and they were expressed in different levels of concreteness or abstraction. After having summarized the recommendations which overlapped content-wise, we decided to group them in five thematic categories, while attempting to order them from the most specific to more general ones. In this chapter we will discuss recommendations which focus on:

1. social change;2. changes in the education system;3. improving the position of young people at the labour market;4. improving the support to young unemployed people.

10.1. Recommendations for social change

Many participants recognize the “social impact” on the opinions of yo-ung people and their chances at the labour market, so it is not surprising that this topic is the focus of a number of recommendations. It could be stated that some recommendations in this category are only “marginally” linked to the problem of youth unemployment. However, as we have already pointed out several times, the way young people think about unemployment rarely has anything to do with the usual formats or the expectations of “experts”.

102

We have divided the recommendations in this category into two sub-gro-ups. The first relates to young people as a social group, and the second to the society as a whole. Firstly, the participants recognized the nece-ssity that young people show more determination and initiative in ful-filling their own potential in all areas of life, including the labour mar-ket. Young people can achieve this by becoming more actively involved in the social arena, contributing to their communities through civil so-ciety and volunteering activities. This tends to reflect positively on their life chances. An important element leading to the realization of this goal, according to our employed participants from Rijeka, is the introduction of civic education into schools:

TYPE 7: Now they’re introducing civic education into schools. I think that’s great. It will substitute “Politics and Economy”. It’s going to raise awareness, what we’ve talked earlier, about some stuff. Why vote in elections, and stuff like that. It’s also going to be about volunteering, encouraging volunteering, and so on. That’s why it’s important to us.TYPE 5: Yeah. Education about basic rights. Our rights. Which we should use. Rijeka, employed and students

Concerning the proposed changes at the level of society, the participants singled out the need to create a social climate (in the sense of the pre-viously described “social mood”) which will not be burdened by current existential problems and the fear of the future. A most prominent feature in this context was the interdependence of the state of economy and the state of society. So our unemployed and inactive participants from Sla-tina suggest “debt elimination” and “termination of interest rates” while an employed participant from Karlovac makes a direct link between in-vestments in production and social development:

TYPE 7: Well, generally speaking, no one’s doing anything. There’s no cir-culation of money. Here the money doesn’t go around. So it’s normal that everything suffers. The entire system is down. Really down. We need to make systemic changes which will encourage not only commerce, but industrial pro-duction, agriculture... The industries which can… Not right away. Nothing can be restored right away after being systemically destroyed for 20 years. Karlovac, employed and students

103

10.2. Recommendations for changes in the education system

Recommendations which focus on changes in the education system can be divided into three sub-groups. The first group of recommendations is more general and addresses some structural deficiencies of the Croati-an education system. The participants expressed their general dissatis-faction with the fact that young people do not have access to quality in-formation when making crucial decisions about the course of their future education, which may in turn affect their professional prospects. An inac-tive participant from Zagreb, who is very acute in his diagnosis, thinks this problem should approached with a combination of comprehensive analysis and transparent informing of young people:

TYPE 8: I think they should be really transparent and show the results. We should have teacher evaluations, we should have... In order to show how many former students... What are they called? Alumni? How many of them are employed. So you know when you’re enrolling in a university programme. Was it 20% of graduates who found a job in their field or was it 90%. This can help you decide. You need to know what your chances are. And not find this out after you graduate, “Boooo. Nobody’s going to hire me. I can’t find a job ‘cause my profession doesn’t exist anymore.” Zagreb, unemployed and inactive

This discussion popped up in different forms in many groups and usually it was connected to the issue of enrolment quotas. Although some partici-pants (particularly employed and students) were eager to “slash or incre-ase” enrolment quotas depending on the needs of the market, the same participant from Zagreb thinks that this approach cannot lead to desired outcomes without a comprehensive analysis:

FACILITATOR: The people said, “OK. Yes. Adjusting quotas is important, but the market changes as well.” So what about this?TYPE 8: Well, you gotta start somewhere. To know at least the approximate number of people who are currently getting employed. And then you could, af-ter having tracked the numbers for 10-15 years, have a temporal analysis, see how things change, and you could draw some conclusion from it. Then may-be people from universities would go and talk to leading people in business. So

104

if you are from The Faculty of Engineering and Computing then you go and meet people from telecommunication companies and other companies which employ your students, and ask them about their 5-year plans, what are the-ir prospects, how many employees they are going to need. And then you can pass this information on to your students. Now what we have is a case of se-vere autism. Everybody’s just doing their own thing. Zagreb, unemployed and inactive

The “autism” does not only relate to educational institutions but to em-ployers as well. Probably directly referring to the previously described issue of employers’ falling to see young people as potential employees, our unemployed participants from Knin sent out a clear message to employers:

TYPE 2: That they don’t require work experience.FACILITATOR: Mhm. Who? This is directed to employers, right?TYPE 2: To private businesses.TYPE 3: To all employers.FACILITATOR: To private businesses. How would you phrase your message?TYPE 4: They should get involved in education of young people. They should be present as early as enrolment. That’s the only way.

Finally, on more than one occasion, the participants linked their re-commendations to the Croatian system of scholarships and student fi-nancial aid. The groups with employed participants mostly focused on the idea of providing financial aid for students training for “in-demand jobs”, and on the need for some sort of support and monitoring system for beneficiaries of financial aid, as pointed out by a student from Osijek:

TYPE 5: So there was this famous “type A” scholarship. It existed before the Bologna system. You could get it on the basis of your university entran-ce exam. If you do well on the exam, you get the “type A” scholarship. And that’s it. You keep getting the financial aid for as long as you study. Regard-less of your GPA, attendance, grades… It’s unbelievable.TYPE 6: I don’t know about that. I got a scholarship from Croatian Tele-com. And I had to... It was like... I signed a contract and everything. The condition was that I had to report every month to this guy in the company, who was my mentor. While I was still studying. And he used to give me

105

all sorts of reading material. “You have to learn this. This is what we do.” Osijek, employed and students

Another set of recommendations in this category is focused on curricu-lum. The participants recognize the importance of integrating basic busi-ness skills and knowledge in the formal education system. An employed participant from Rijeka gives a very concrete example:

TYPE 6: What’s missing is this very basic component. Sorry. This basic com-ponent, that you can’t have people graduating from university and not knowing how to write a memo, how to write a decent e-mail, how to fill in a bank tran-sfer form and stuff like that. That’s not an administrator’s job. Everybody sho-uld know how to do these things. When you see some of the job application, you just want to die. These very basic skills aren’t covered anywhere in the system. Not in the primary school, not in the secondary school, not in the university. So there’s no one who knows this stuff. Rijeka, employed and students

The participants emphasized more than once the need to modernise cu-rriculum and the teaching process. They pointed out the importance of integration of content which would equip young people with the skills and knowledge necessary for starting one’s own business. Our education system on all levels was evaluated negatively in the aspect of transferring this type of skills and knowledge.In the final set of ideas/recommendations the participants express the-ir opinion that educational institutions should take on a more proactive role in assisting their students in career development, which refers speci-fically to universities. Many groups with employed persons and students formulated recommendations similar to the one by this participant from Pula who found a job after a long search:

TYPE 7: Maybe they should somehow connect students with potential em-ployers. Or at least encourage successful students. Promote them. Maybe there could be a university service which would help students so they don’t have to fight alone, but to help them network with other actors in this field. Pula, employed and students

It is obvious that the education system must overcome numerous, contro-versial, and sometimes even complicated problems, in order to better pre-

106

pare young people for the labour market. Our participants have plenty of ideas how to improve the education system. But what changes do they propose in order to improve the situation on the labour market?

10.3. Recommendations for improving the position of young people on the labour market

As we have already seen, the participants perceive volunteering as an im-portant source of support in the period of unemployment, both as a tool for overcoming psychological difficulties, as well as a means for acqui-ring relevant knowledge which could prove useful at the labour market. However, as our participant from Slatina correctly noted, there is much confusion over what “volunteering” is or is not:

TYPE 7: I think many people still don’t have a clue what volunteering really is, ‘cause... Some offer fees for volunteers? But then that’s not volunteering. In this case you’re a part-time worker. Slatina, employed and students

This quotation clearly points to the need for more education on voluntee-ring, both for young people and employers. Mixing up volunteering with internships was common in many focus groups and it led participants to speak about internships as volunteering, particularly in the recommen-dations section. One of the interesting recommendations connected to this topic is the idea of tax breaks for employers who offer “volunteering” opportunities for young people without work experience. Another refers to the state support for internships – our participants think that the state should secure financial and material preconditions because “employers cannot afford it”. The participants in general think that volunteering, in-ternships and different part-time jobs should be more recognized by em-ployers. It is important to note that the relatively few examples of situa-tions where employers seem to value this type of engagement were nor-mally linked by our participants with private and civil sectors. A student from Osijek, perhaps prompted by thoughts of her imminent entry in the labour market, points out that it would be useful to put in place some for-mal mechanisms for recording this kind of experience:

107

TYPE 5: It’s the same with student jobs. We all had student jobs, but when it comes to our resumes… You can’t put it as work experience, ‘cause it’s not in your employment record. I mean, I do, ‘cause I work at the university, but that doesn’t... But some... My sister. She never listed her student jobs in her resume. And her employment record was empty ‘cause she just got out of university. I think all the things you did should be somehow recorded. Any work expe-rience. If you volunteered for I don’t know how many years then you know how that particular job is done. And I think it should be officially recorded. Osijek, employed and students

Within this category we can single out some recommendations which tar-get employers. It should be noted that they were brought forth mostly by our participants from Split. This set of recommendations contains ide-as like better monitoring of employers for the purpose of preventing the previously described negative practices, as well as a set of ideas for va-rious areas in which Croatian employers should be trained and educa-ted. Along with the aforementioned “business culture”, we would like to highlight a very sensible recommendation by a participant from Karlovac who has entrepreneurial experiences. He offers tips on how to make em-ployers more aware of the fact that without young people there can be no progress, innovation, and hence no sustainability:

TYPE 7: I mean, training and raising awareness of employers. That’s num-ber one. ‘Cause they’ve been banished from a system that’s not working to-day. Anywhere.FACILITATOR: What kind of training? TYPE 7: In general, I mean. Relations among employees. How should they be-have, how will they… I mean, I still don’t get these employers who have 7-8 workers ready for retirement and they count on them to work for the next 30 years. Or I don’t know, 15 years. 20. They don’t think strategically, what’s go-ing to happen in 10 years’ time. Only by employing a young person can they modernise their production. That’s the only way. And the way of working and the speed, everything. I don’t know. When a guy is 60 years old and ready for retirement, you can’t expect him to do anything more or better than what he’s been doing for the past 40 years. Karlovac, employed and students

The final set of recommendations is linked, directly or indirectly, to ac-tive employment policy measures. The participant often spoke of the need for “these measures” to be more adjusted to the needs of young pe-

108

ople and to concrete circumstances on the ground. One of the most frequ-ent recommendations is the one which refers to the removal of the pro-vision stipulating previous work experience as a precondition for eligibi-lity for unemployment benefits. A student from Split thinks that this pro-vision does not correspond to the Croatian reality:

TYPE 5: If you’ve never worked, you don’t qualify for benefits. But I think it would be OK if people without work experience could also get it. At least yo-ung people, 2-3 months after university, until they figure out what they want to do. ‘Cause, I mean, when you’re 24-25, it’s not like you’re ready for life. Split, employed and students

The participants also often recommended that the “state should provide more incentives for employing young people” (although it appears that relatively small number of participants know concrete information about the existing incentives), that “employment taxes should be reduced” and that it is important to facilitate procedures for starting a business. Intere-stingly, they find financial and educational support equally important in the first years of doing business, as well as removing administrative ob-stacles which seem to be an important off-putting factor for young peo-ple. We will conclude this set of recommendations with interesting wor-ds from a student from Osijek:

TYPE 5: Six months ago my friends opened up a business, Ltd. It took them 3-4 months to do it. And they’re, like, young economists with good grades from university. It’s unbelievable. I mean, I know that bureaucracy is tough. But even if you understood these things better, it would still take you 40-50 days to open up a business. Osijek, employed and students

10.4. Recommendations for improving support to unemployed young people

The recommendations in this category were developed mainly by the participants from bigger towns, namely Rijeka and Zagreb. Most refer to the creation of a system which would guarantee young people an effici-

109

ent transfer of relevant information about employment opportunities, in-ternships, volunteering and life-long learning programmes. As we have seen earlier, a considerable number of participants argue that there is no system in place which would offer relevant and comprehen-sive information to young people about this kind of opportunities. Most participants suggest a one-stop-shop type of solution. Among many ide-as, we would like to single out the one about stronger involvement of ci-vil society organizations and educational institutions in informing yo-ung people about employment and educational opportunities. An inte-resting idea, linked to an often repeated opinion about the insufficiently used potential of the Internet, is offered by an unemployed participant from Knin:

TYPE 2: We all use the Internet. Maybe they could set up a web portal with and list our rights and opportunities, and a place where we could ask all our questions. Instead of calling a zillion numbers. And they just keep re-direc-ting us. Nobody gives you a concrete answer. Maybe a portal where they co-uld find answers to our questions. For us. Instead of calling around, and then, after a while, you end up where you started in the first place. Knin, unem-ployed and inactive

Another set of recommendations in this category is related to mechanism for transferring to young people specific labour market-related knowled-ge and skills. This type of ideas was present in the focus groups held in Zagreb. For instance, an inactive participant thinks it may be useful to open up specialized agencies which would offer expert support to young unemployed people:

TYPE 8: I’ve just thought of it. You know these agencies which exist in We-stern countries, where you can come in and they help you find a job. They tell you what you’re missing, information about continuing education, how to pre-pare for an interview. That sort of stuff. A person who is, simply, an expert in helping people to find a job. All the stuff you don’t know. How to write a re-sume, how to behave at an interview, what do they expect from you, what to wear. All these helpful little details which no one can tell you. Zagreb, unem-ployed and inactive

On the other hand, an employed participant from Zagreb, referring to the previously identified obstacles to youth entrepreneurship, empha-

110

sizes the importance of cooperation and networking, recognized by others as well:

TYPE 6: I’d like to mention networking and mobility. I mean, networking of entrepreneurs and initiatives.FACILITATOR: Sorry, what do you mean by that?TYPE 6: Well… I mean there should be a network of some kind where people from different sectors could use each other’s services.TYPE 5: Like a cluster.

Finally, the participants want to see the CES work better, the public in-stitution they consider crucial in providing support to unemployed yo-ung people. In the text covering the work of CES it was very difficult to differentiate between recommendations for improvement from the narra-tive and the description of the support if offers. It appears that the parti-cipants’ dissatisfaction and frustrations come “in package” with their re-commendations for improvement. In order to avoid unnecessary overlap-ping, in this category we decided to single out one concrete and often re-peated recommendation which refers to potential broadening of the set of services offered by CES, taking into consideration that a number of re-commendations targeting the work of CES were integrated in sections 6.5.2., 8.2. and 9.2. Many participants often feel that the scope of the CES services, which do not necessarily offer the biggest support in job-searching, is rather limi-ted. Some think that the focus of its work should not only be on provi-ding support in the process of job-searching, but should include a more comprehensive support to young people in how to deal with the pro-blem of unemployment. The previously mentioned idea of a “one stop shop” is clearly formulated into a recommendation through the words of a long-term unemployed participant from Zagreb:

TYPE 3: Maybe CES should also have a stronger advisory role. No one gives you information, unless you ask. My counsellor never said, “This looks OK on your resume, and this doesn’t.” I may not know all this stuff by myself. Sure, I go online and check out examples of good resumes, “This looks OK on your application. You should put this in as well.” It’s like you said at one point, “This is the attitude you need to have when you go on an interview.” I mean... To have someone to talk to. If something happens, to have a legal service, or something like that, which can help you out. I was lucky. I have a lawyer fri-

111

end so he explained some stuff to me. But many people don’t know what to do. In a situation like that. Zagreb, unemployed and inactive

Considering the previously described negative features of the labour mar-ket, it comes as no surprise that this participant thinks that young job-seekers often need, besides the “usual” CES services, access to more spe-cific services – legal help, for instance. Again we come back to the fun-damental issue of the gap between young people’s expectations from CES and its (legally) defined mission. However, we should not forget that the art of creating public policies lies in bridging these gaps, and laws are only instruments which policy-makers use for achieving this goal.

113

11. INSTEAD OF A CONCLUSIONAs you probably have realized on the basis of the title of this final chap-ter, you are not about to read a conventional conclusion which gives a systematic summary of the most significant findings of this research and consultation process. This aim was fulfilled, we hope, by the summary presented in Chapter 3. This final section of our journey through the world of youth unemployment, we decided to dedicate to a few subjecti-ve, but in our opinion relevant, reflections about the process, which co-uld not fit in previous chapters. We will also try to come back to some of the most prominent implications of this study, both from the aspect of so-cio-economic development, as well as from the point of view of future ro-les young people can (and should?) play in it.For starters, it should be noted that the complexity of unemployment ne-ver ceases to intrigue us. If this study has failed to add fresh insights into the socio-economic position of young people in Croatia and their pros-pects at the labour market, we believe that, at least, it has helped rai-se awareness that youth unemployment, as seen through the eyes of our protagonists, is not rooted exclusively in the economic sphere, and that the scope of its consequences, as well as their real descriptions, always manage to surpass our expectations. The analysis of discourses and narra-tives in Chapter 6 indicates that the participants, according to their abili-ties, imagination and a number of other factors, recognized an entwined web of forces which affect the problem and largely define their current positions and life chances. This is a message to all who wish to create pu-blic policies with neatly packaged “instant solutions”. As eminent British author Rhodes said, “Every complex problem has a simple solution. The only difficulty is that it is usually wrong.” (Rhodes, 1997: xv)This study of youth unemployment lays a sound foundation for a more comprehensive view of what young participants think about the society they live in, and the opportunities it has to offer to them and their peers. Allow us here to express our unequivocal concern. In the course of the implementation of this project, we have observed a wide-spread fear of near and distant future, discontent caused by the lack of understanding and care of older generations, disappointment with capacities of the sta-te to support young people through difficult challenges they face at the labour market, and concern the current direction of our economic “de-velopment” does not lead towards a future of welfare and opportunities.

114

Sceptics will understandably say, “Well put, but why do young people in Croatia choose not to express their discontent in public? Why are the fin-dings of this study so hard to see in the public sphere?” The answer to this question is a source of a great deal of pleasure for us. The use of qua-litative methodology, namely focus groups, in the implementation of the structured dialogue on youth unemployment, in our opinion has fulfilled its purpose. Despite the limitations presented in section 4.3.1., we belie-ve that the methodology managed to “feel the pulse” of young people and depict an image of what and how young people think about the pro-blem of unemployment. Of course, the image is still blurry and incom-plete, but our hope is that, by further combining qualitative methodo-logy and mechanisms for participation in decision-making processes, we can contribute to the rise of “citizen science” in Croatia, while making sure not to overestimate its benefits and to take into account its weakne-sses (Bloor et al., 2001: 98). This suggests that, regardless of the potential embedded in this type of process for expanding knowledge and involving groups which are usually excluded from socio-political debate, it will re-main always incomplete, if political structures remain reluctant to draw lessons from it and to transform these lessons into political decisions.Although the limited time of the implementation of this study did not allow for a “type” analysis – our unit of analysis was focus group – it is possible to state that our “type 4” participants, whom we described as young people with “fewer opportunities”, in general did not participate in the focus groups in the same extent as other types, which by no me-ans implies that there were no great contributions. Simply, this is a spe-cial group, but its participants are not “special” because they have not-hing to say, but quite the contrary. It comes as no surprise that a two-hour discussion with a group of unknown people, who often do not sha-re their opinions, was not for them an ideal setting for discussing really important topics. Their perspective deserves, in our opinion, a separate study adjusted to their needs. However, in general, the collected data po-ssesses enormous and, for now, untapped potentials, primarily through the analysis of the contributions of different types, which can contextua-lize and deepen the understanding of some of the findings of this study.The gap between young people and those whom they see as decision-makers, in this case, again proved to be wide and deep. We came to this conclusion by examining repeated outcomes of the consultations with stakeholders. Regardless of the clearly defined framework of the con-sultations, more often than not we witnessed the dominance of a clima-te of mutual distrust, misunderstanding and fear. With fair exceptions, many stakeholder representatives often felt attacked by questions of our

115

participants which tackled the work of their organizations and instituti-ons. Young people, especially our unemployed participants, found it very difficult to step into another person’s shoes, rise above the level of the-ir personal problems and see the consultation process as a bigger pictu-re. While recognizing that a part of responsibility lies in the preparati-on of the focus groups, more exactly in insufficient time designated for “breaking the ice”, it is certainly the fact that stakeholders are not accu-stomed to speaking openly with young people, and vice versa, that is at the core of this problem. On the other hand, it is not surprising: most participants from both “sides” never had the opportunity to practice this approach. If relevant actors show the willingness to adopt the position that the structured dialogue is a continuous process of including yo-ung people in socio-political life, then there is a hope that the gap will shrink, if not close. Finally, how to assess the contribution of this study? We believe that that time will be the judge of that. Seen from the aspect of the involvement of yo-ung people in solving the problem of youth unemployment and many other social issues which concern them directly, it is possible to say that the achie-vements correspond to the words of famous British prime-minister:

This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

117

12. BIBLIOGRAPHYBOOKS, PAPERS AND RESEARCH:Adriaanse, Carlinde, 2005. The utility of the ‘social climate’ concept in understanding urban neighbourhood-life: A theoretical approach and ini-tial empirical evidence. In:Doing, thinking, feeling home: the mental ge-ography of residential environments. International ENHR conference.Bayley, Deborah/Gorančić-Lazetić, Helena (ed.) 2006. Izvješće o druš-tvenom razvoju, Hrvatska 2006 - Neumreženi: Lica socijalne isključeno-sti u Hrvatskoj, United Nations Development Program in Croatia, ZagrebBell, Jell, Sinclair, 2002. Narrative Inquiry: More Than Just Telling Sto-ries. In:TESOL Quarterly, 36(2), 207 – 213.Bloor, Michael/Frankland, Jane/Thomas, Michelle/Robson, Kate, 2001. Focus Groups in Social Research. London:Sage Publications Ltd.Butler, Judith, 1997. Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative. RutledgeCrnković Pozaić, Sanja/Meštrović, Branka, 2010. Nezaposlenost mladih: glasovi protagonista: sažetak rezultata istraživanja. Gopa ConsultansDružić, Ivo, 2012. Efficiency of Anti-inflation Paradigm in the long run. In: Backović, Marko/Karadžić, Vesna (ed.), 2012. Economic Deve-lopment and Institutional Organization(1), CIDEF.Beograd: p67-101.Finch, Helen/Lewis, Jane, 2003. Focus Group. In: Qualitative Rese-arch Practice: A Guide for Social Sciences Students and Researches. London:Sage Publications Ltd.Hughes, John/Sharrock, Wes/Martin J, Peter, 2003. Understanding Cla-ssical Sociology: Marx, Weber, Durkheim. London:Sage Publications Ltd.Ilišin, Vlasta, 1999. Mladi na margini društva i politike. Zagreb:Alineja.Kernion, Nilda I., 2005. Adolescents’ Lifestyles and Body Weight Percep-tion. ProQuest Information and Learning Company.Matković, Teo, 2009. Mladi između obrazovanja i zapošljavanja: isplati li se školovati? United Nations Development Program in Croatia, ZagrebO’Connor, Hugh, 2011. Youth Unemployment in Ireland – The Forgotten Generation.Dublin:National Youth Council of IrelandPotočnik, Dunja, 2011. Strukturirani dijalog s mladima u Republici Hr-vatskoj.Zagreb: Agency for Mobility and EU ProgrammesRochet, José Manuel, 2006. Capability and Life Chances: An Assessment of Two Analytical Traditions. In: 2006 Annual International Conference

118

of the Human Development and Capability Association, Groningen, The Netherlands, 29 August-1 September.Rhodes, R.A.W., 1997. Foreword, In: Kickert, Walter J.M./Klijn, Erik-Hans/Koppenjan, Joop F.M. (ed.). Managing Complex Networks: Strate-gies for the Public Sector, Sage Publications Ltd, xi-xv.Yanow, Dvora, 2007. Qualitative-Interpretative Methods in Policy Re-search. In:Rabin, Jack/Muzentrider, Robert F./Bartell, Sherrie M. (ed.), 2007. Handbook of Public Policy Analyses: Theories, Politics and Met-hods. CRC Press: p405-417Warner Wail, Susan/Wildemeersch, Danny/Jansen, Teo, 2005. Unem-ployed Youth and Social Exclusion in Europe: Learning for Inclusion. As-hgate Publishing Limited

OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS: Commission Communication from the Commission to the Council, the Eu-ropean Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 27 April 2009 – An EU Strategy for Youth: In-vesting and Empowering – A renewed open method of coordination to address youth challenges and opportunities. COM, 27.04. 2009National Programme for Youth, 2009-2013 Ministry of Family, Veterans’ Affairs and Intergenerational Solidarity, 2009National Employment Action Plan, 2011-2012 Croatian Employment Ser-vice, February 2011United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, World Youth Re-port 2003: The Global Situation of Youth. New York, 2004

119

ONLINE SOURCES:Miliša, Zlatko, 2012: Od skeptične do bumerang generacije, Available at: http://www.dnevno.hr/kolumne/zlatko_milisa/od_skepticne_do_bume-rang_generacije_/623284.html, 15.05.2012Međimurski Internet portal: Zašto sam odlučila reći “Zbogom” Hrvat-skoj? Available at: http://www.emedjimurje.hr/obrazovanje/zasto-sam-odlucila-reci-zbogom-hrvatskoj, 14.05.2012.The Statistical Office of the European Union: www.eurostat.euMreža mladih Hrvatske: www.mmh.hrEuropean Youth Forum: www.youthforum.orgThe Free Dictionary: www.thefreedictionary.com

OTHER SOURCES:Presentation Danko Oračić: Utjecaj gospodarske krize na tržište rada i so-cijalnu uključenost – stanje i kretanja, JIM and JAP conference on further activities and implementation of measures, 17.05.2011

120

ANNEX 1: LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL WORKING GROUP FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STRUCTURED DIALOGUE

1. Ivana Kordić, Volunteers’ Centre Zagreb2. Tatjana Križanec, Croatian Employment Service3. Morana Makovec12, Ministry of Social Policy and Youth4. Lana Načinović, Institute for Labour Market Development5. Monika Pozderac, Ministry of Labour and Pension System6. Petra Sentić, Croatian Employers’ Association7. Dunja Potočnik, Institute for Social Research8. Darko Šeperić, Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia9. Aleksandra Štengl, Croatian Employment Service10. Ana Žužić, Association ZUM, Pula

12 Till the end of 2011 the position of a member of the Working group on behalf of the former Ministry of Family, War Veteran’s Affairs and Intergenerational Solidarity was held by Ms Mar-tina Štabi. When the new Ministry of Social Policy and Youth was founded her responsibilities were taken on by Ms Makovec.

121

ANNEX 2: FOCUS GROUP PARTICIPANTS’ RECRUITMENT PROTOCOL

Dear colleagues,As previously arranged, we will organize 2 focus groups in each town (2 gro-ups x 8 towns adds up to 16 focus groups in this research). The central the-me of the research is young people’s perception of youth unemployment. In order for our results to be valid, it is important that our focus grou-ps have a specific composition of participants. Trust me, lots of time and energy has been invested in construing an adequate sample which will guarantee diversity of opinions and ideas (this is the main aim of the structured dialogue method) and at the same time will encourage inte-raction in the focus groups. So please, follow carefully the following di-rections for recruiting participants. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

BASIC INFORMATIONNumber of focus groups: 2 (16 participants per town)Duration: max. 90 minutes Age of participants: 15-30Sex: 8 male, 8 female (structure of focus groups is further explained)Participants’ place of residence: your town or near vicinity (if necessary, transportation to and from location should be arranged)The process of recruitmentParticipants for this research will be recruited through the snowball method, which means selecting the sample by using social networks, acquaintances and other social links between individuals. The process begins by choosing a single participant13, and through him or her iden-tifying other people (friends, family, acquaintances, “friends of friends”) who might fit the profile. These potential participants give recommenda-tions for a next group of potential participants. The process goes on un-til the desired sample structure is achieved (taking into consideration the below-mentioned limitations).

13 This doesn’t necessarily mean that you may select only one participant. You can have initial conversations with as many as 15 people. This will give you a more comprehensive recruitment base. Who your first participants will be, we leave up to you.

122

LIMITATIONS1. Employees and members of managing bodies of partner organiza-

tions may not participate in focus groups.2. Out of 16 potential participants, only two may come from the

ranks of members of partner organizations, assuming they don’t fit the description in 1) – volunteers, associates, passive membership.

3. Friends and family may not participate in the same focus group, but they may take part in different groups. So it’s very important that you report to us such relationships so we may place these par-ticipants in different groups (for example: X fits the criteria of type 5, and he’s best friends with Y who fits criteria of type 3). It’s re-ally important that we have this information before we start pla-cing participants in different groups.

TYPES OF FOCUS GROUPS PARTICIPANTS8 unemployed persons (two of each type)Type 1 – m/f, aged 15-30, completed primary or secondary education, unemployed, actively looking for employment, no work experience (offi-cially recorded)Type 2 – m/f, aged 15-30, completed higher education, unemployed, ac-tively looking for employment, no work experience (officially recorded)Type 3 – m/f, aged 15-30, has work experience, lost employment due to the economic crisis, education level irrelevantType 4 – m/f, aged 15-30, unemployed, belongs to a group with fewer opportunities (Roma, disabled persons, persons in or out of care, persons with criminal record...)

• 2 studentsType 5 – student, m/f, aged under 25, desirably has some work experi-ence (part-time, student job)

• 4 employed personsType 6 – m/f, aged 15-30, found employment soon after (in up to 3 months) completion of education, education level irrelevantType 7 – m/f, aged 15-30, found employment after a long search (more than a year), education level irrelevant

• 2 inactive persons

123

Type 8 – m/f, two basic profiles: a) young persons who after high school didn’t manage to enrol into university and are waiting for another chan-ce; b) young people who are, for any number of reasons, dependent on the long-term on a person or institution (for instance: a young pregnant woman supported by her partner)14

IMPORTANT REMARKS: 1. Participants in this type of focus groups (they don’t know each

other, nor do you) tend to not show up, although they had confir-med their attendance. So it is good to have a “back up” for each participant who didn’t confirm or who simply seems to you a bit “suspicious”.

2. Although the tasks of partner organizations are listed below, I wo-uld like to point out that your main task is to recruit 16 partici-pants according to the criteria and send us a list of contacts along with justifications why a person fits a certain category at least four working days prior to the focus group. We will then contact potential participants and place them in focus groups.

3. In case you’re not able to find 8 male and 8 female participants, a 9:7 ratio is acceptable (for example, if you can’t find a type 6 male participant, but you have an extra female participant, which incre-ases the overall number of female participants to 9).

Role of partner organizations• recruiting participants according to the instructions (dissemina-

ting a call15 for participation and contacting participants)• communication with MMH about potential developments and

difficulties• after you have achieved the desired focus group composition, you

should send to MMH a detailed list of participants’ contacts (and their substitutes) four working days before the focus group takes place, assign participants with their types and briefly explain the underlying categorisation logic; MMH will then divide partici-pants in groups and contact them for confirmation of attendance

14 We would like to point out that these are model examples and it’s possible to find many other instances of young people inactive in the labour market. Being inactive in the labour market means that a person is unemployed and is not looking for employment. So any person who fits this description is a potential type 8 participant. Important: this doesn’t refer to students and pensioners who are not considered labour.15 MMH will create and send to you a unified call for participants.

124

• you should arrange, if necessary, transportation for dislocated par-ticipants (you can drive them yourself or cover their transportati-on costs from the amount allocated for partners’ costs)

• you should arrange for refreshment for participants• if you have disabled participants you should make sure that the

focus group venue is wheel-chair accessible• you should arrange for a flip chart with enough paper and marker

pens, as well as an adequate working venue• a focus group in progress should not be interrupted (people coming

in and out, loud conversations in the room next-door, phones, etc.)• one person from your organization should be available for facili-

tation assistance (note-taking – the role will be described in more detail in the facilitation protocol)

PARTICIPATION OF STAKEHOLDERSThe MMH facilitators will limit the duration of focus groups to a maxi-mum of 90 minutes. After that, 30-40 minutes will be allocated for mee-tings of participants and representatives of stakeholders. If you have any questions prior to and during the recruitment process, please don’t hesi-tate to contact me.

Kind regards,Nikola Buković, project coordinator

125

ANNEX 3: RESULTS OF ONLINE CONSULTATIONS

1. Age:

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGE15 - 19 156 14.99%20 - 24 551 52.93%25 - 30 334 32.08%

2. Sex

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGEMale 288 27.67%Female 753 72.33%

3. You are...

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGEHigh school student 85 17%University student 557 53.51%Unemployed 228 21.90%Employed 171 16.43%

4. You live in...

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGERural area 141 13.54%Small town (less than 30000 inhabitants) 201 19.31%Big town (more than 30000 inhabitants) 158 15.18%Macro-regional centre (Osijek, Rijeka, Split or Zagreb)

541 51.97%

126

5. What is your education level?

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGENo school 2 0.19%Elementary school 50 4.80%Three-year secondary school 33 3.17%

Four-year secondary school 514 49.38%

Polytechnic 65 6.24%University graduate 316 30.36%Post-graduate 46 4.42%Other 15 1.44%

6. What is the monthly amount of income available for your own disposal?

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGELess than 500 Kuna 394 37.85%501 Kuna - 2000 Kuna 370 35.54%2001 Kuna - 3500 Kuna 119 11.43%3501 Kuna - 5000 Kuna 78 7.49%More than 5000 Kuna 80 7.68%

7. What is the source of the above income (multiple Responses are possible)?

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGEI receive an allowance from my parents/guardians

675 64.84%

I receive a scholarship 142 13.64%I receive a family pension 21 2.02%I earn income by doing a student job (student contract)

287 27.57%

I earn income by doing a honorary / part-time job

145 13.93%

I have full-time temporary employment 87 8.36%

I have full-time permanent employment 96 9.22%

127

I work without an employment contract (on the black market)

112 10.76%

Other 61 5.86%

8. (a) In your opinion, is it easier or harder for young people to find em-ployment than persons in the 30-40 age group?

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGEMuch easier 90 8.65%Somewhat easier 253 24.30%The same 294 28.24%Somewhat harder 278 26.71%Much harder 126 12.10%

8. (b) In your opinion, is it easier or harder for young people to find em-ployment than persons in the 40-50 age group?


8. (c) In your opinion, is it easier or harder for young people to find employment than persons in the 50+ age group?


128

9. In your opinion, what are the most significant causes of youth unem-ployment in Croatia?

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGECroatian education system is of low qua-lity and does not teach young people the skills and knowledge necessary for the la-bour market

361 34.68%

Young experts are undervalued in Croatia 335 32.18%There are no jobs available for holders of a bachelor’s degree

362 34.77%

Labour legislation does not encourage youth employment

168 16.14%

Some young people achieve unsatisfactory education results which reflects negatively on their employment prospects

40 3.84%

There are no entry-level jobs 206 19.79%Employers do not want to employ young people without work experience

732 70.32%

Young people in Croatia expect unrealisti-cally high salaries and secure jobs

103 9.89%

General unemployment in the country is high and young people share the fate of the rest of the population

309 29.68%

Young people do not know how to look for a job

54 5.19%

Public institutions which should help yo-ung people to find employment are not do-ing their job

185 17.77%

Young people do not know persons who co-uld help them to find employment

92 8.84%

Other 21 2.02%

129

10. In your opinion, who is the most responsible for high youth unem-ployment in Croatia?

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGENational government 761 73.10%Local and regional governments 333 31.99%Croatian Employment Service (and other employment agencies)

171 16.43%

Employers 361 34.68%Trade unions 35 3.36%Unemployed young people who do not look for employment

157 15.08%

Other 42 4.03%

11. In your opinion, what could help young people to find employment more easily?

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGEInternships/traineeships in the course of education

573 55.04%

A good system for advertising job vacancies 310 29.78%

Training for efficient job-seeking (how to write a resume, how to do well in a job in-terview...)

163 15.66%

Support clubs for unemployed young people 44 4.23%

Accessible continuing education 184 17.68%High-quality continuing education 154 14.79%Employer incentives for hiring young people 557 53.51%

Other 17 1.63%

130

12. How does/did being unemployed affect you standard of living?

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGEMy standard of living significantly deteriorated

290 27.86%

My standard of living somewhat deteriorated 229 22.00%My standard of living did not change 127 12.20%My standard of living improved 7 0.67%I have not been unemployed 388 37.27%

13. Has it ever happened that, due to your unemployment, you and your family lack money for...

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGEFood 137 13.16%Clothes 291 27.95%Bills 309 29.68%Vacation 469 45.05%Leisure activities (going out, hobbies...) 483 46.40%Independent housing 355 34.10%I have not been unemployed 315 30.26%Other 64 6.15%

14. What do you plan to do in case of long-term unemployment?

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGEI will stay in my place of residence and look for a job in my profession

186 17.87%

I will stay in my place of residence and look for any job

358 34.39%

I will look for a job in my profession el-sewhere in Croatia

403 38.71%

I will look for any job elsewhere in Croatia 302 29.01%I will look for a job abroad 478 45.92%I will continue education in Croatia 290 27.86%I will continue education abroad 215 20.65%

131

I will find a volunteering placement in a firm or institution in order to gain work experience

441 42.36%

I will open my own business 293 28.15%Other 38 3.65%

15. In your opinion, what are the key factors for getting a good job in Croatia?

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGESkills and competences required for do-ing a job, which are not necessarily tau-ght in formal education (communication skills, team work, computer skills...)

363 34.87%

References and recommendations (from teachers, former employers, colleagues...)

154 14.79%

Relevant work experience 394 37.85%Motivation to perform well at work 104 9.99%Ambition for career advancement 81 7.78%Profession-related skills and knowledge 171 16.43%Willingness to work overtime 92 8.84%Favouritism 588 56.48%Other 15 1.44%

16. In your opinion, how will Croatia’s EU accession affect your em-ployment prospects?

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGEIt will have very negative effects. 109 10.47%It will have somewhat negative effects. 128 12.30%It will not have any effects. 346 33.24%It will have somewhat positive effects. 400 38.42%It will have very positive effects. 58 5.57%

132

17. How would you rate your knowledge about EU-related employment opportunities?

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGEVery bad 102 9.80%Bad 281 26.99%Average 449 43.13%Good 171 16.43%Very good 38 3.65%

18. In your opinion, what will be the most positive changes that you expect from Croatia’s EU accession?

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGEInvestments and EU funds will open lots of jobs, which will improve youth em-ployment

345 33.14%

Young people will use opportunities to travel and work abroad and their skills and experiences will later contribute to Croatian development

549 52.74%

EU funds will open jobs for young people in poor and disadvantaged areas

163 15.66%

Croatia will improve employment servi-ces for young people

107 10.28%

Croatia will improve the education system

121 11.62%

EU accession will not have positive effects 298 28.63%Other 32 3.07%

133

19. In your opinion, what will be the most negative changes that you expect from Croatia’s EU accession?

RESPONSE NUMBER PERCENTAGEYoung people in Croatia will have to com-pete with immigrant cheap labour

499 47.93%

Many educated young people will emi-grate from Croatia to work in other Euro-pean countries

547 52.55%

Some sectors of economy will suffer from EU competition which will cause more job losses for young people in Croatia

440 42.27%

All good and well-paid jobs in Croatia will be taken by foreigners

251 24.11%

EU accession will not have negative effects

45 4.32%

Other 20 1.92%

134

ANNEX 4: PROTOCOL ON PREPARATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF FOCUS GROUPS AND CONSULTATIONS1. PREPARATION AND ARRIVAL OF PARTICIPANTSThe venue should be set up at least 30 minutes before the start of the focus group, and the participants should be told to arrive 10 minutes be-fore. The venue should be set up in the following manner:

1. the partner organization should arrange for a flip chart, paper and marker pens;

2. you should arrange for a (smaller)16 desk or table and two chairs for the facilitator and the assistant coming from the ranks of your organizati-on, and chairs for participants which should be laid out in a semi-circle;

3. you should make sure that the consultations are not interrupted or disturbed, as described in the Focus group participants’ recrui-tment protocol.

The participants are greeted by a person from the partner organization (“a familiar face”) and are introduced to the facilitator. The facilitator engages in brief, non-formal conversations with participants, unrelated to the topic of the meeting. After each conversation, the facilitator han-ds out to the participant a short questionnaire which aims to collect ba-sic information about the participants.

2. PRESENTING THE PROJECT/TECHNICAL INFORMATION (3 MINUTES)

• thank the participants for coming• emphasize the importance of their participation for the project• state the title of the project and its donors: the Ministry of Family, War

Veterans’ Affairs and Intergenerational Solidarity and the Youth in Ac-tion programme

• explain the main purpose of the project: to collect young people’s experiences and opinions about the problem of unemployment and their recommendations for improvement

• point out that this type of activity is being carried out in 7 more Croa-tian towns, and inform about the ongoing online consultations

16 A very big desk or table may create a barrier between participants and the facilitator.

135

• the outcomes will be presented to decision-makers in May/June 2012 at a one-day conference

• let them know that the entire conversation will be recorded and kindly ask them to speak loudly and clearly and not to interrupt each other

• present the assistant and explain that his/her role is to take notes for the sole purpose of easier identification of speakers in transcriptions of focus group content

• make clear that the organizers will do everything in their power to protect the identity of the participants and will not disclose any perso-nal or sensitive information; give an example of how this will appear in its final form (“Participant Y said...”)

• ask them to refrain from disclosing this type of information about the-ir friends, family, etc.

3. GETTING TO KNOW EACH OTHER (7 MINUTES)• check with the participants if it’s OK to be on the first-name basis• introduce yourself, explain your role in the project and present

your facilitation experience (point out that your main role is to fa-cilitate and steer their communication)

• participants take turn and introduce themselves – their name, the manner in which they were recruited, their experience of unem-ployment (note: at this point it’s possible to ask participants que-stions relating to the introductory conversations – for example: “So Marko, you live near Osijek. How did you come to our mee-ting? I hope we didn’t bust your plans...”)

• after the introductions point out that the diversity in the group is a huge value and that differences in opinion and experience are crucial to the success of this process, so in this respect there are no right or wrong answers

• point out that, despite their differences, they also share many common features: age and the position at the labour market

4. SET OF QUESTIONS ABOUT FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO UNEMPLOYMENT (20 MINUTES):

• before the first set of questions, you ask the participants to speak freely and not to wait for their name to be called out

136

The discussion is introduced in this manner:As we’ve already said, today we’re here to talk about the problem of youth unemployment. In the course of the discussion you can use your own expe-riences, as well as those of your friends, acquaintances and family. Here we have a set of factors which are usually considered to contribute to youth unemployment. What do you think about the list? Are they totally off the target or do they reflect the reality? Is there something missing, something you’d like to add? (Marker pens are available for writing down new factors. In case participants link this to actors, you should focus it by questions17.)Focusing exercise – Take a look at the factors which are thought to cause unemployment18. Can each of you pick the 3 most important ones? Can you sort them according to their importance?19

A discussion ensues, as well as comments on potential differences in percep-tion and clearing out potential overlaps and inconsistencies. You encourage the discussion with the following question: “OK, so some of you singled out the X factor, some of you the Y factor and others the Z factor. Can you, plea-se, elaborate on the ways in which they contribute to youth unemployment?”Two important remarks in this phase:

• the facilitator doesn’t mention the factors which were not brought up in the discussion by the participants, unless the group is extre-mely inactive

• in this phase it’s important to get every participant to speak; otherwi-se, this is going to be much more difficult to achieve later on.

5. SET OF QUESTIONS ABOUT RESPONSIBLE ACTORS (20 MINUTES)Who’s responsible for this? You have singled out a number of potenti-al actors, but surely they don’t all equally contribute to the problem. Is anyone more responsible? In which manner do they contribute to the problem? Most of you singled out Z, while Marko and Srđan singled out X. What do you think about that? Can you account for your choice? Do

17 For instance, a participant says that the government is one of the factors contributing to unemployment. The facilitator directs the discussion back to factors by asking following questions: “How does the government contribute to the current situation? By corruption (facilitator’s answer to participant’s potential answer)? What does that mean? Could you link this description to the X factor? What do the others think?18 The facilitator should have a list of factors on small cards which can be reshuffled according to participants’ reactions. The facilitator should also have several empty cards for writing down additional factors identified by participants.19 The facilitator reshuffles the cards according to participants’ opinions.

137

you think things work differently in the developed European countries? Can you explain the differences?

6. SET OF QUESTIONS ABOUT EXPERIENCES OF UNEMPLOYMENT20 (20 MINUTES)What’s your experience of unemployment? Tell me more! Which pro-blems are you (or unemployed persons) facing? Why do you think it is so? Do you think that unemployment will have consequences on your future (or the future of your friends/family)? How does being unem-ployed make you (young people) feel? Do you feel like you’re (they’re) on your (their) own in the face of these problems? Who offers you (them) support? The facilitator may introduce provocative questions in case the group is non-responsive: “Some say that most unemployed young people don’t give a damn. What do you think?”Important note: In this phase it’s important to pay special attention to “type 7” participants (persons who found employment after a long sear-ch). You can ask them specific questions like: “Looking back, how do you see your experience of unemployment? How did it affect you and how do you look at work?”

7. SET OF QUESTIONS ABOUT RECOMMENDATIONS – POINT OUT THAT THIS IS THE LAST TOPIC OF THIS SECTION (15 MINUTES)How you think youth unemployment will affect the Croatian society? What are the social consequences of unemployment? If you had the power to change things, what would you do? What changes could impro-ve the present situation?

• the facilitator writes recommendations down on a flip-chart paper

8. OVERVIEW OF THE DISCUSSION (5 MINUTES)• go over the recommendations and give a short overview of the en-

tire discussion; point out that it was successful and express your gratitude

• announce that they will have 30 minutes to discuss their re-commendations with persons relevant to the position of young pe-ople at the labour market

20 The parentheses contain questions for participants who haven’t experienced unemployment.

138

9. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (30 MINUTES)9.1. INTRODUCING NEW PARTICIPANTS (3 MINUTES)

• briefly introduce them, their organizations/institutions, and why they are relevant to our discussion

• describe to the stake-holder representatives the process so far as extremely valuable and fruitful and move on to presenting the conclusions

• point to the advisory nature of their role in this panel: young parti-cipants have a final say on the content of their recommendations!!!

9.2. PRESENTING RECOMMENDATIONS (5 MINUTES)• the facilitator briefly presents the most important recommendati-

ons using the notes on the flip-chart paper9.3. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS OF STAKEHOLDER REPRESENTATIVES (10 MINUTES)

• the stakeholders give brief comments on the conclusions and re-commendations and suggest improvements

• here the facilitator becomes a moderator (keeps track of time)9.4. ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS (10 MINUTES)

• the participants are asked if they have any questions for the experts• they are asked if they wish to change any of their initial recommen-

dations (however, it should be emphasized that it’s not necessary to reach a consensus and that different opinions are an asset in this process, and not a burden)

• in case of agreement, changes are made; if consensus is not reached the facilitator states that recommendations will remain unchanged, but the final report will include different opinions as well

9.5. CONCLUSION (2 MINUTES)• another thank-you to all the participants• announce the upcoming project activities and state your availabi-

lity for any further questions

139

10. ADDITIONAL REMARKS• the facilitator should be familiar with the Tuckman phases in creating

small groups and take into consideration its specificities• the facilitator should keep track of and adequately respond to non-

verbal reactions and cues of participants and examine their meaning• after an intense exchange, the facilitator should recap the discussion

using the names of the participants, which will be helpful for transcri-bing focus group content

• the assistant from the ranks of the partner organization should take notes for the purpose of easier identification of speakers in a later phase – the notes should be sent to MMH in an electronic form as soon as possible

• there should be a minimum 1-hour break between the focus groups• it’s extremely important to warn the stakeholder representatives about

the need for their timely arrival and about their advisory role in the consultations; the final decision about the outcomes of the focus gro-up is up to the young participants

Annex 5: List of stakeholders represented in the structured dialogue consultations

Bodies of the Croatian Employment Service:1. Central Office (Zagreb)2. District Office in Rijeka3. District Office in Split4. District Office in Osijek5. District Office in Pula6. District Office in Karlovac7. Local Office in Slatina8. Local Office in Knin

Other stakeholders:9. Croatian Chamber of Commerce – County Chamber in Pula10. Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia11. Administrative Department for the Economy of the Istria County

whos afraid of the big bad crisis

Documents